Lietuvos istorijos studijos
Not a member yet
829 research outputs found
Sort by
Lietuvos Didžiosios Kunigaikštystės Valdovų rūmų Atkūrimo Byla. Vieno požiūrio likimas. Sud. A. Bumblauskas. Vilnius: Vilniaus universiteto leidykla, 2006. T. 4, 236 p.
No full textSud. A. Bumblauskas. Vilnius: Vilniaus universiteto leidykla, 2006. T. 4, 236 p
,,Cura animarum" zakonu kaznodziejskiego w sredniowieczu na tie rozwoju duszapasterstwa rnniszego
Get PDFOn the 21st of January 1217, St. Dominic Guzman and his order were given the bulla "Gratiarum omnium" from the Pope, Honorius III (1216-1227), which approved their idea of preaching and spreading the Gospel; thus they became independent from the bishops because they received their traditional regulations in that field. The document permitted the Dominicans the pastoral activity in all dioceses without the duty of requesting the bishops for the permission, which had been practiced formerly. While describing the Dominicans\u27 pastoral work, the medieval Canon Law should also be referred to since there appeared the term "cura animarum ordinaria." It was connected with the parish church exclusively and resulted from the parish law granted by a bishop. The rule concerning the mentioned law stated that every member of a parish should have his own assigned priest called "sacerdos proprius" and "parochus," or instead the priest\u27s assistant. Their authority concerned the following important services: baptism, marriages, funerals, confessions, and administration of other sacraments, and both conduction of Sunday and other church holiday ceremonies. It could be stated that until the coming into existence of mendicant orders within the borders of a parish, the clergy had a monopoly on the cult and pastoral work. Moreover, the mentioned above public religious services came under the rule of parish obligation ("cultus publicus") and were to be received only in the parish church. Since "cultus privatus" had a tendency to grow in towns and the parish priests were unable to administer their duties completely, thus the Dominicans took over in this field. "Cura animarum extraordinaria," which was led by them, functioned together with "cura animarum ordinaria." During the development of individual cult, there began a gradual exclusion of the majority of elements, which so far belonged to "cultus publicus," out of parish obligation ("cura animarum ordinaria") to include them in "cura animarum extraordinaria." Then the Dominican orders became quasi-parish places of cult, and the pastoral work in general was to be administered by both clergymen and monks as if on a double track. It often caused sharp disagreements between priests supported by bishops and mendicant orders. The popes\u27 attitudes towards the entitlement of pastoral activity led by mendicant orders differed. Innocent IV (1243-1254) supported the lay clergymen strongly. Alexander IV (1254-1261), Martin IV (1281-1285), and Benedict XI (1303-1304) were on mendicant orders\u27 side. Boniface VIII (1294-1303), however, supported the idea of compromise. The Pope, Clement V (1305-1314), regulated the situation at the Council in Vienne (1311-1312) deriving from regulations of the bulla "Super cathedram" by Boniface VIII that was released on the 18th of February 1300. In the "Dudum" constitution from 1312, he established, with fundamental recognition of free pastoral activity for mendicant orders, regulations to the advantage of parish "cura animarum" (e.g. mendicant orders were obliged to pay the parish priest a charge which was a sort of compensation). Although the decisions of the Council did not prevent the further conflicts completely, they were a crucial point in the development of pastoral relations and at the same time a turning point in their organization until the Tridentine Council (1545-1563). They caused a partial crisis of the parish monopoly in the field of pastoral work
Prabyla senosios Kernavės miestiečiai. Rec.: Gintautas Vėlius. Kernavės miesto bendruomenė XIII-XIV amžiuje. Vilnius: Vilniaus universiteto leidykla, 2005. 112 p.
Get PDFValstybiniai perversmai Baltijos šalyse (1926 ir 1934 m.): panašumai ir skirtumai
Get PDFThe article compares the political upheaval that took place in Lithuania 80 years ago with those staged in Estonia and Latvia in 1934. Their similarities and differences are discussed, and their historiography is compared. All the three were classified as military-political coups that caused transition from democratic to an authoritarian ruling system without changing socio-economic system or foreign policy. The main alleviating circumstance common to the coups in the Baltics was disproportionate domination of legislative power over the executive in the period after the First World War. The alternatives of power distribution are discussed, employing the Finnish model of democratic system, according to which the parliamentary power is outweighed by the stronger institution of President. The model enabled a more flexible reaction to the danger of extremist trends or serious blows to democracy; it also contributed to the protection from damaging impact of outward influences, which was especially noticeable in Estonia.
The differences in the coups in the Baltic states are connected with the differences of the time and circumstances, as socio-economic conditions were different in 1926 and 1934 (the Great Depression and its consequences in Latvia and Estonia, while only a local crisis was experienced by Lithuania). The international situation was different as well: growing activity of the right-wing radicals after fascists took power in Germany and consolidation of Stalin’s dictatorship in the USSR. The most significant difference is thought to lie in the fact that the 1926 coup was directed against the reforms that were planned or undertaken by the left-wing coalition, while the 1934 political upheavals attempted to prevent a possible takeover by the right-wing extremists, though some data can be found that by means of a coup K. Ulmanis was also interested in removing Social Democrats—the strongest political party in Latvia—from their path to power. The coups were different in their technique as well. The government was overthrown only in Lithuania, while in Latvia and Estonia those in power consolidated their position even more, i.e. being in possession of a part of the democratic power, seized it all and turned it into authoritarian.
However, the democratic systems were destroyed in all the Baltic States, thus, the lessons learnt should stay in our heritage and cultural memory. Three aspects of the approach to the coup are being developed in recent Latvian historiography. Aivars Stranga (earlier partly Edgars Dunsdorf) and some other researchers mainly from the University of Latvia deny the validity of the objective prerequisites of the upheaval. Meanwhile, Karlis Ulmanis\u27 strive for authoritarian power and the political short-sightedness of the Social Democrat leaders is being emphasized. Antonij Zunda would like to find more thorough analysis and less criticism in the evaluation of the coup. The scientists from the Institute of History of Latvia tend to focus their attention on the analysis of the prerequisites of the coup, even admitting that the coup was inevitable. Neither in Estonian nor in Lithuanian historiography can the above trends be observed; critical analysis of the coup is prevailing in both
Baltų vieta barbarų pasaulio tipologijoje (M. Ščiukino „septynių pasaulių" teorijos plėtotės link)
Get PDFIn dem Artikel wird der Platz der Balten in der Welt behandelt, die die Antikeleute als „Barbaricum" – eine Welt der fremden, unbekannten Leuten bestimmten. Eine Zeitspanne der sogenannten „Barbarei" haben in ihrer Geschichte alle Völker Europas erlebt. Im Mittelalter hat man mit diesem Begriff besonders die Heiden bestimmt. Welchen Platz belegen die Balten unter den Barbaren? Warum sind sie auf der informell existierenden barbarischen Völkerliste so lange in der Gesinnung der Leute der christlichen Zivilisation geblieben?
Als methodischer Grund bei der Vorbereitung dieser Veröffentlichung wurde das theoretische Schema „der sieben Welten" des Professors der Archäologie an der Sankt-Peterburger Universität Mar Schtschūkin gewählt, nach dem das Schema der Sonderung der europäischen kulturellen Regionen der Römerzeit gebildet wurde. Auf Grund dieses von Schtschūkin vorgeschlagenen Schemas, wie eines theoretischen Modells, versucht man in diesem Artikel den Platz der Balten in der geschichtlichen Entwicklung Europas von den ältesten Zeiten bis zu den Anfängen der Staatsbildung einzuschätzen.
Der größte Teil der Balten lebte auf dem torfhaltigen Waldgebiet, wo die äußere, sogar die innere Kommunikation sehr beschränkt war. Diese Gebiete wurden von allen wichtigsten Handelswegen Osteuropas ausgewichen. Das hat die Entwicklung der kulturellen und sozialen Prozesse gehemmt. Das Land hat nur sehr beschränkten Einfluss der äußeren Welt gehabt, man hat ganz selbstständig gelebt und entwickelt, nur stufenweise und meistens mit Verspätung hat man die Brüche, die von den äußeren Faktoren bestimmt wurden, erlebt. Noch deutlicher hat das sich in der von ugro-finnischen Stämmen offenbart. Nur ein kleiner Teil der baltischen Stämme hatte genug Raum, expansiv zu werden, unter sich im Kontakt zu stehen und mit anderen Stämmen nicht nur im Festland, sondern auch im Meer zu verkehren. Nämlich die Stämme, die am Meer wohnhaft waren, waren auf ihrem kulturellen Entwicklungsweg am meisten vorwärtsgekommen und auf ihrem Fortschrittsniveau zu der bestimmten Zeitspanne waren sie dem Entwicklungsniveau der germanischen Stämme Westeuropas und Skandinaviens nah.
Zu Wikingerzeiten sind die Balten wie in die „offene Zange" geraten – aus dem Westen durch Polen näherte sich allmählich zu ihnen die lateinische Westzivilisation. Aus dem Osten und bedeutend heftiger beeinflussten die Balten die von dem Byzantinischen Einfluss eingewirkten Slawen, die zur gleichen Zeit besonders starken Einfluss der skandinavischen Wikinger spürten. Die Balten von der Weichsel bis zum Daugavaufer, als auch die Esten, sind zum „weißen Fleck", fast unbekannt für das übrige Europa geblieben, das Christentum nicht aufgenommenen „die letzten Barbaren" geworden. Während die herumliegenden Regionen sich ganz schnell entwickelt haben, verspäteten sich die Balten, aber doch gingen sie vorwärts, näherten sich zu den Vorstaatsbildungen und der früheren Staatsgründung. Zusammen mit den Ugro-Finnen sind die Balten am längsten als der „barbarische" Teil in der gesamteuropäischen historischen Entwicklungsgeschichte geblieben, doch das haben die objektiven Faktoren bestimmt
Antivalstybinė Klaipėdos krašto nacionalsocialistų veikla ir priedangos organizacijos 1935-1937 metais
Get PDFNazi movement in Klaipėda region, alike any social-political phenomenon in the 1st half of the XX century, had its beginning and its end. The 1st national socialist organization in the region had been established as early as in 1928. In 10 years, i.e. in 1938 "nazification" of Klaipėda region was finished. Military tribunal decision to imprison SVG and CSA organizations\u27 leaders did not put an end to national-socialist movement.
Around 1000 block and cell leaders remained free and carried on with their activities. Members of the forbidden SVG party and their supporters were restoring the national-socialist movement. A broad agent network had been established - informants and cooperatives had been recruited in „larger Lithuania" and its state institutions. With their help, nazis were successfully restoring their movement in Klaipėda region. Contacts with Germany were restored and constantly strengthened using the newly formed agent network. Undercover nazi movement in Klaipėda region had been attracting more and more local population. SVG leaders, probably instructed by Germany, divided the movement into 2 parts: 1) extremely carefully camouflaged, but absolutely legal activity in Klaipėda regional parliament, within the limits of its competence; 2) undercover - national-socialist propaganda distribution, "political education", military training and diversions.
These features are the most typical for the period of 1935 to late 1937. National-socialist movement evolved into a new stage. The whole movement had been de-centralised - national-socialist information distribution sources had been established in almost all legally acting organizations in Klaipėda region. Religious, youth and sports organizations were the most politically engaged and propagandistic. All undercover activities of these organizations had been fine-tuned by a special A. Hitler\u27s directive for Klaipėda region issued in the end of November 1935. Though the period of 1935 to 1937 seems to be kind of blank (there were no large demonstrations with nazi war-cries and swastikas, there were no brutal terrorist acts, not even larger riots), but the anti-constitutional activity to strengthen the national-socialist movement was much more constructive
Sovietmečio palikimas šiandieninėje Lietuvoje: iškreipta nuosavybės santykių samprata
No full textŽlugus Sovietų Sąjungai, Rytų ir Vidurio Europos šalys, kartu ir Lietuva, neretai yra pavadinamos „antrąja Europa", agrariniu regionu ar Vakarų Europos periferija. Kultūrinis ir ekonominis „naujosios Europos" išskirtinumas dažnai aiškinamas „kitokiu" šių šalių visuomenių mentalitetu, kuris buvo (su)konstruotas sovietinio kolektyvizmo ir planinės ekonomikos modelio. Neretai konstatuojama, kad Rytų ir Vidurio Europos visuomenėse lėtai kintančios mąstymo kategorijos daro įtaką ekonomikos ir jos funkcionavimo sampratai. Ne išimtis ir Lietuva.
Ideologinis ir fizinis kolektyvizmo diegimas ir privataus sektoriaus žlugdymas prieštaravo Lietuvoje įsitvirtinusiai verslumo ir privačios nuosavybės sampratai. Straipsnyje teigiama, kad sovietmečiu buvo būdingas abipusis dviejų sektorių (kolektyvinio ir privataus) sutapimas, kai privačios nuosavybės samprata sėkmingai „adaptavosi" komandinėje ekonomikoje ir per visą sovietmetį išliko aktyvi žmonių tarpusavio santykiuose. Tačiau toks „šešėlinis" privataus sektoriaus statusas veikia ir iškreiptą nuosavybės santykių formavimąsi, kuris pasireiškė valstybinio ir privataus sektorių funkcijų dubliavimusi. Atkūrus nepriklausomybę, vykusios greitos žemės, nuosavybės ir socialinės reformos Lietuvos mieste ir kaime susidūrė su kolektyvizmo praktika ir „šešėlinės ekonomikos", „šešėlinio verslumo" tradicija, kuri buvo įdiegta sovietmečiu. Visa tai visuomenėje sąlygojo socialinio netikrumo jausmą ir susipriešinimą
Istorinės kultūros studijų projekto recepcija Lietuvoje (Apie Rūtos Šermukšnytės daktaro disertaciją „Lietuvos istorijos aktualinimas Lietuvos dokumentiniame kine ir televizijoje (1988-2005 m.)" ir jos gynimą)
Get PDFSupraslio vienuolyno konfesinės priklausomybės ir pobūdžio klausimas XVI amžiaus pradžioje
Get PDFIn historiography, Suprasi Monastery (the administrative district of Grodno, currently Poland near Bialystok) is almost universally treated as the center of Orthodoxy of the GDL of the 16th century, and its founder Aleksandras Chodkevičius (Pol. Aleksandr Chodkiewicz) is unquestionably regarded as an Orthodox. However, in modern historiography (J. Maroszek) the foundation of Suprasi Monastery is considered within the context of the realization of the programme of the Church Union at the turn of the 15th/16th c. The hypothesis has been put forward (R. Černius) that apart from the project of the Church Union of Jonas Sapiega, the nobleman of the GDL (common house of prayers devoted to the rites of two confessions - Catholic and Orthodox), there was another project of the implementation of the Church Union of the GDL Metropolitan Juozapas Bulgarinovičius. It is the Church founded by Jonas Sapiega in Ikazn (the administrative district of Braclav, current Belarus) that fully corresponds to the model of the common house of prayer. It becomes obvious that such house of prayer, together with the community of Orthodox believers, is subordinate to the Catholic Bishop, rather than to the Orthodox Metropolitan, so the Orthodox believers as if lose their separate church and autonomy, which was left to them by the Union of Florence. Meanwhile, Metropolitan Bulgarinovičius sought to strictly adhere to the agreements of the Union of Florence—he proposed the model of the universal Church Union, where the primate of the Pope is recognized, however, a separate Orthodox Church of the Greek rites remains.
The fact of the foundation of Suprasi Monastery, which took place during the movement of the implementation of the programme of the Church Union, clearly showed the confessional orientation and direct relationship of Aleksandras Chodkevičius with Kiev Metropolitan Bulgarinovičius\u27 programme of the renewal of the Church Union of Florence. All that determined Aleksandras Chodkevičius\u27 decision to establish a monastery in his dominion, which remained „Orthodox" in a sense that it maintained formal relations with the metropolitan, though it gained considerable, legally substantiated autonomy. From the viewpoint of the Orthodox Church, this autonomy could mean that Suprasi was „open" to the Catholic Church, especially to the continuation of the informal local Church Union. In this case, the real confessional content of Suprasi is nothing but Catholicism of the Greek rites
