Lietuvos istorijos institutas

The article is devoted to the results of the research of the fortress Tyagin, built by the Lithuanian Grand Duke Vytautas on the territory of the island Bolshoye Gorodishche in the late 14th to early 15th century. The archaeological materials provided valuable information about the syncretism of the complex of monuments on the island, the typology, layout and size of the fortress. It was one of the earliest stone castle-type fortresses on the northern Black Sea coast, a part of the defensive line of the southern borders of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania. The fortress’ defensive system included a synthesis of defensive architectural elements, ranging from timber-engineered structures known from Old Russian times to stone walls and buttresses of a new level of fortification in Europe. The fortress was armed with artillery and edged weapons, the main type being crossbows, which were widespread in Lithuania. The fortress of Tyagin was situated at the crossroads of trade routes between the East and the West, at the crossroads of the custom. The artifacts testify to the presence of Lithuanian cultural objects, Genoese influence, contact with Crimea, and trade and economic relations with Poland. The monument is an integral part of the cultural heritage of Lithuania and Ukraine.

The aim of this article is to assess the value of Marija Alseikaitė-Gimbutienė’s (Gimbutas) 1946 dissertation published in Tübingen (Germany). It is also important to follow how much of an impact this work had on Lithuanian archaeology and what inspiration it may provide for scholars today. This paper concentrates on the parts of the book which deal with burial customs during the Roman Iron Age. Relevant problems of cultural divisions based on burial site types as per Gimbutienė are examined to see how much this classification may be accepted today. The second part of Gimbutienė’s dissertation, which focused on the meaning of burial customs, provides insights that are still important for scholarship today, and reveals the young scholar’s ability to reconstruct an old belief system and to discern the prospects for the further investigation of burial site material.

Gimbutas’ topicalisation of gynocentrism was of great significance in stimulating the study of figurines, influencing the humanities beyond archaeology, as well as a variety of international socio-political movements. The creations have a long tradition of being linked to fertility and suffer a predominantly onesided treatment in research. In this context, the intellectual history of the interpretation of prehistoric social living conditions is analysed, critically questioned and the extent to which historically evolved role models are present in past and recent research is examined. On the basis of selected examples, the methods of ethnological analogy and stylistic analysis are used to contribute to the interpretation of the decorations of the SE European Neolithic material. Additionally, an application-related interpretation is proposed for the Cucuteni-Tripolye figurines of the Poduri set. The second part addresses the impact history of Gimbutas’ opus. Regardless of the justified methodological criticism, its various imprints on e. g. ethnography, feminist studies, as well as outside academia will be acknowledged. The contributions profoundly inspired a variety of societal currents in the USA, Germany and post-socialist Lithuania.