Lietuvos istorijos institutas

1918–1940 m. spaudoje neretai sutinkame žodžius „Tautos šventė“, kuriais įvardijama svarbiausioji valstybės šventė, tačiau tai gali reikšti skirtingas šventes: Nepriklausomos Lietuvos valstybės paskelbimo dieną, Steigiamojo Seimo susirinkimo dieną, Žolinę ir Vytauto Didžiojo karūnavimo dieną. Straipsnyje analizuojamos 1918–1940 m. Lietuvos Respublikoje švęstos valstybės šventės. Išsikėlus tikslą atskleisti valstybės švenčių formavimą Lietuvoje remiantis istorinio lyginamojo metodo galimybėmis, keliami uždaviniai: atskleisti valstybės švenčių kūrimo dinamiką; išanalizuoti valstybės švenčių hierarchinės struktūros kaitą; aptarti valstybės švenčių šventimo formas ir visuomenės joms teikiamus prioritetus; taip pat apžvelgti Lietuvos valstybės švenčių savitumus 1920–1939 m. Lenkijos okupuotose Lietuvos teritorijose.

The paper deals with Johann Jacob Quandt’s (1686–1772) manuscript Prussian Presbyterology (Germ. Preußische Presbyterologie, vol. 1–5, ~1737–~1772, hereinafter referred to as QPP), currently stored in the Secret State Archives Prussian Cultural Heritage Foundation in Berlin (Geheimes Staatsarchiv Preußischer Kulturbesitz; GStA PK: XX. HA Hist. StA Königsberg, Hs, No. 2). The author of the presbyterology Quandt was professor primarius of theology at the University of Königsberg, the chief court preacher, and General Superintendent of Prussia; for over four years, he supervised the Lithuanian Language Seminar (1723–1727), and for two decades, he was in charge of publishing Lithuanian religious literature. The paper presents an overview of the history of the QPP manuscript, the aspects of its attribution, the structure and the content of the text, and the main sources of reference, with the focus on the QPP significance for the research into the history of Lithuanian writings. As testified by the analysis of handwriting, QPP is Quandt’s autograph. It is his largest currently known autograph and a very important part of his written heritage. Quandt worked on his presbyterology in Königsberg over three decades, from approximately 1737 until the last years of his life (his latest entries date back to the period between 1768 and 1772). Based on handwriting analysis, the chief court preacher, General Superintendent of Prussia, and later on, Archbishop of the Prussian Evangelical Church Ludwig Ernst von Borowski (1740–1831) was found to have been one of the contributors to that presbyterology. His additions were rather sporadic and found merely in volumes 1 and 2; they date back to the year 1816 or slightly later. An anonymous inscription on the provenance of the manuscript (QPP I 1) is also to be assigned to Borowski’s hand; together with the information provided by the Manuscript Catalogue of the Prussian State Archive Königsberg, it testified to Borowski having been the owner of volumes 1 to 4 of QPP. Both that fact and the handwriting analysis as well as the dating of subsequent additions led to the revision of Albert Nietzki’s (1866–1923) statement about the manuscript having been inherited and abundantly supplemented by Quandt’s colleague Daniel Heinrich Arnoldt (1706–1775): he could only have been the owner of volume 5 of QPP or its reader (between 1772 and 1775). The entries of the so far unidentified main contributor to QPP date back to the period between 1816 and 1829. In the mid-nineteenth century, Quandt’s manuscript continued to be supplemented by a third contributor.

Straipsnyje siekiama aptarti ankstyvąjį vaiko auklėjimą šiuolaikinės (XXI a. pradžios) Lietuvos šeimoje. Apžvelgiamos vyraujančios vaiko auklėjimo šeimoje kryptys, dėmesį sutelkiant į pateikėjų emic perspektyvoje atsirandančias vaiko auklėjimo interpretacijas bei per jas atsiskleidžiančias vaiko ir vaikystės sampratas. Ši analizė atliekama pasitelkiant etnografinio lauko tyrimo medžiagą: 100 pusiau struktūruotų interviu su tėvais, kurių vaikai gimė XXI a. Remiamasi kultūros antropologės Adrie Kusserow individualizmo interpretacijų teorija. Šios autorės teigimu, skirtingi individualizmo stiliai – ji juos vadina švelniuoju (soft) ir kietuoju (hard) – pasižymi labai skirtingomis žmogaus, socialinės tvarkos, gyvenimo trajektorijos ir vaiko socializacijos sampratomis. Pasitelkiant šią teorinę prieigą analizuojama situacija Lietuvoje.

1940 m. okupacijos sąlygomis vykę rinkimai klastoti visose fazėse: nuo kandidatų atrankos būdo iki Seimo nutarimų priėmimo. Tačiau rinkimuose dalyvavo didžioji dalis Lietuvos gyventojų. Jų apsisprendimą lėmė ne tik tiesioginio ir netiesioginio spaudimo priemonės: pasų žymėjimas, baimė tapti „liaudies priešu“, rinkimų išvakarėse įvykę buvusių politinių partijų lyderių areštai. Straipsnyje teigiama, kad didžioji dalis visuomenės neboikotavo rinkimų, nes turėjo politinių, socialinių iliuzijų. Juos skatino ir kylančios etninės įtampos. 1940 m. rinkimai vyko formuojantis socialiniam konfliktui, kurį paskatino politiniai procesai. Aktyvų dalyvavimą rinkimuose lėmė auganti etninė įtampa tarp lietuvių ir žydų, kurią sukėlė visuomenėje pradėjęs dominuoti įsitikinimas, kad žydai siekia įsitvirtinti Lietuvos politiniame-administraciniame aparate ir iš ten išstumti lietuvius. Daroma išvada, kad rinkimai nebuvo boikotuojami ir dėl visuomenės iliuzijų dėl prosovietinės, socialistine forma valdomos, tačiau nepriklausomos Lietuvos. Tikėta, kad balsavus už komunistų partijai nepriklausiusius kandidatus, išliks galimybė išvengti Lietuvos inkorporacijos į SSRS.

The oldest foundation and donation related documents intended for Orthodox churches and monasteries and issued by private persons date back to the late 14th century. Until the mid- 15th century only isolated documents are available, however starting with the 1440s the number of documents gradually increases up to the very beginning of the 16th century. In total, 107 documents are known (their register is presented in the article). Throughout the period under investigation most of the document drawers were regional dukes (mostly the Gediminids, several Rurikids), however, starting with the middle of the 15th century persons of noble descent were also recorded among the document drawers. 32 different locations where Orthodox churches and monasteries were provided for have been detected (mostly in the duchies of Kiev, Mstislavl, Pinsk, and Slutsk). The largest number of grants (15) were issued for the maintenance of Kiev Pechersk and Pustynsk monasteries which suggests of the importance of Kiev as the centre of religious authority. Document subscriptions indicate that most of the persons who wrote these documents were laymen. The formular of the documents of this type underwent important changes in the middle of the 15 century and at the turn of the 16th century. First of all, in the mid-15th century important trends in the use of corroboratio (corroboration) and testatio (witnessing) formulae were recorded. Corroboratio was first detected in 1445 and soon became a customary section of the document. The principal corroboratio formulae were taken over from Latin documents, however, their distinctive feature was that almost half of the formulae in 1480-1528 had document transfer certificate which was not used in Latin documents. The introduction of corroboratio in the mid-15th century coincided with certain trends in other types of Ruthenian documents, however the emphasis on document transfer was much less frequent there. Testatio is detectable from 1465, however, it was not frequently used until the beginning of the 16th century. There was a variety of testatio formulae obviously borrowed from Latin documents. Two documents have the final part of the formula indicating “other witnesses” which was common of Latin formulae. Testatio in other types of Ruthenian documents was detectable from the late 14th century and starting with the mid-15th century it became a customary section of the formular. In the middle of the 15th century the formular of foundations and donations was supplemented with pertinentio (transfer of rights) and obligation. At the end of the 15th century the verbal invocatio (invocation), the clause of the “freedom of determination and common sense”, and promulgatio (promulgation) were introduced. The use of the verbal invocatio was rather uncommon as compared to Latin foundations which for the most part had that formula. The lack of the verbal invocatio could be considered as a certain peculiar feature of the Ruthenian GDL foundations. Most common were the Holy Trinity formulae typical of the Byzantine tradition, the Name of the Lord formulae, characteristic of the Latin documents, were less frequent. The clause of the “freedom of determination and common sense”, and promulgatio were adopted from Latin documents. In other types of private Ruthenian documents promulgatio was used from the mid 15th century, foundations and donations were the last ones to adopt this formula. By the beginning of the 16th century, however, it had become a part of most documents of this type. The influence of the Latin document is also evidenced by several documents dating back to the 1520s which were dated indicating Anno Domini. It is worth mentioning that by the 1510s promulgatio and testatio became commonly used and corroboratio was an almost mandatory section of the formular.

Yatvigian Book (hereinafter YB) is a conventional, probably the most exhaustive and the most important description of the ethno-cultural tradition of the tribe that spoke Yatvigian, one of the two languages of Western Balts, recorded during the Reformation period. It is based on the source of information disseminated in several variants of manuscripts, and later in small printed books (reprints). Unfortunately, the original of YB has not been found yet, and the scholars who discussed this source or analysed it to some detail after the appearance of Wilhelm Mannhardt’s book Letto-Preussische Götterlehre (1936), which contains copy A(p), resorted not to the analysis of the copies, but to the materials provided in the book, and did not doubt the authenticity of the given information. Due to these reasons, historical facts of the manuscripts were not investigated as the information in Mannhardt’s monograph was taken for granted. Unfortunately, in many cases it does not correspond to reality and is essentially erroneous or elliptical. Textological analysis of ten surviving manuscripts of YB shows that the method of information structuring in the copies A(p), α, B, X of the old edition presupposes a reflection of the mandatory tradition of the preparation of diplomatic documents, i.e., those that are related to the legal field: the presentation of factual material follows strict rules established for preparation of such works – a prologue, a narrative, and an epilogue. Although this circumstance has not been highlighted by any of the researchers of the source analysed, it is extremely important, because it can be related with the intent of the work and the aim

Ilgą laiką antrosios kartos imigrantų tyrimai rėmėsi dichotomine imigrantų įsitraukimo teorija, tačiau dešimtojo dešimtmečio viduryje atliktų tyrimų rezultatai parodė, jog daugiaetninėje aplinkoje antrosios kartos imigrantų tapatybės konstruojamos sumaišant ribas ir sujungiant erdves, esančias abipus etninių laukų. Straipsnyje siekiama atskleisti, kaip lietuvių kilmės antrosios kartos imigrantų, gyvenančių Londone, patirtys derinant dviejų skirtingų kultūrinių laukų lūkesčius – vieno, kuriamo tėvų namuose, kuriame vyksta transplantuotais kultūriniais / etninias modeliais gindžiamas gyvenimas, ir kito – dominuojančio už namų ribų – bei nuolatinio ribų tarp šių kultūrinių erdvių peržengimo praktikos įrėmina jų tautinės tapatybės darybos procesus. Straipsnyje remiamasi lauko tyrimo, atlikto 2013–2014 m. Londone, duomenimis.

In discussing the issue of the authorship of Daukša’s Postilė, some scholars raise the question of the unevenness of the language of this work and the ambiguity of some corrigenda. One of such corrigenda to give rise to various linguistic hypotheses – aimieus to łáimieus – should be considered simply a mistake of the person who corrected the mistake. In fact, the correction had to be done in the opposite direction – łaimiaus to aimieus, but pages were mixed up due to an oversight, and page 88 was indicated instead of page 78. This mistake was very likely made by Daukša himself and not by the typesetter at the printer’s. If the latter were the case, the old and not matching indication of the line (38) would have remained next to the wrong page number. However, the corrigendum indicates line 33 of page 88: presumably, when Daukša was revising the corrigendum, he found one of the two given forms and made corresponding corrections without giving much thought to them.

On 3 December 1522, the King of Poland and the Grand Duke of Lithuania Sigismund the Old issued a charter whereby he confirmed all donations and emoluments granted by his predecessors, by magnates, boyars, and townspeople to the Franciscans of Vilnius established there in about 1387. The documents were brought to the royal attention by prior George of Cracow who asserted that he managed to collect only 54 ones, while the rest must have perished due to the lack of care on the part of his own predecessors. Fortunately, the prior was not right as no less than 27 additional documents did survive to this day. The analysis of all of them (81) allowed us to break down the patrons into such groups as grand dukes 4 (4.9%), magnates 15 (18.5%), boyars 55 (67.9%), and townspeople 7 (8.6%). It was then possible to establish what kind of relations and by what families were maintained between lay people and friars. It has turned out that grand dukes and magnates provided only grants and did this up to the mid-15th century, while townspeople and boyars displayed a more variegated pattern of relations ranging from grants to sales for real price to sales below the real value. The most intense relations between the friars and the boyars started sometime in the mid-15th century, and this correlates well with the advancement of boyars as founders and patrons of churches and undertakers of other charitable activities. The charter of 1522 contains information relevant to the establishment of the mother-house of the Lithuanian Franciscans and its subsequent rise to prominence. It also displays data valuable in terms of historical geography and persons involved. The reason for the making of this charter is to be viewed in the attempts of the Franciscans to safeguard their holdings around the manor of Kena and inside Vilnius by having them declared to be exempt from secular authorities and placed under the regime of ecclesiastical immunity. This concern was timely enough as the movement of Protestant Reformation was gathering pace in German lands and was already felt in this part of Europe as well. Appendix 1 contains a critical edition of this hitherto unpublished charter. Its original is kept in Cracow, at Biblioteka Naukowa PAU i PAN – Ms. 481.