Journal:Acta Historica Universitatis Klaipedensis
Volume 15 (2007): Baltijos regiono istorija ir kultūra: Lietuva ir Lenkija. Karinė istorija, archeologija, etnologija = History and Culture of Baltic Region: Lithuania and Poland. Military History, Archaeology, Ethnology, pp. 45–54
Abstract
The article presents historical and economic study of Volhynia–Gdańsk regional trade end economic zones during the period from the beginning of the 16th to the middle of the 17th centuries. Change of a dominating role of the Mediterranean economic region, decline of the territories concerned with it, and also processes of economic growth of the countries concerned with Baltic, considerably has affected commodity structure of Volhynia at that time. By these tendencies increases value of Volhynia in geography of the European trade. It was one of barter centres among the East and the West of the Europe. However, already from the middle of the 16th century occurred an active inclusion of the representatives of narrow-mindedness, clergy and gentry to the trade. During this period significantly increases the export to the international market through the Baltic trade and economic region.
Journal:Acta Historica Universitatis Klaipedensis
Volume 15 (2007): Baltijos regiono istorija ir kultūra: Lietuva ir Lenkija. Karinė istorija, archeologija, etnologija = History and Culture of Baltic Region: Lithuania and Poland. Military History, Archaeology, Ethnology, pp. 35–43
Abstract
The article is devoted to the historical studies of a princely landownership concentration in Volhyn lands in the 16th century. This landownership was the highest in all the Grand Duchy of Lithuania. According to historical materials, in first third of the 16th century Volhynian princes owned 44% of all landed fund of Volhyn (in correlation with ‘pans’ and ‘zemiane’ landownership; the royal and church was insignificant), in the last third it slightly grew up to 45 %. In the end of century these indexes remained unchanging. In Lutsk district of the Volhynian province a level of concentration of princely landownership was a few other. In last third of the 16th century princes owned 40 % lands, and on the end of century it percent correlation diminished to 38 %. Such calculations are conducted by author on materials of Lutsk deed books, and it allowed to trace and to analyze the specificity of the landed circulation of Volhynian princes in details.
Journal:Acta Historica Universitatis Klaipedensis
Volume 15 (2007): Baltijos regiono istorija ir kultūra: Lietuva ir Lenkija. Karinė istorija, archeologija, etnologija = History and Culture of Baltic Region: Lithuania and Poland. Military History, Archaeology, Ethnology, pp. 25–34
Abstract
The article is devoted to the problem of jurisdiction of ‘starosta’ (a medieval official) during the second half of the 15th – the first third of the 16th century. ‘Starosta’ was one from the most important officials in the Volhyn land. He was designated by the Great Lithuanian Duke. During this period the judicial duties of ‘starosta’ were regulated by the norms of legislative acts named ‘ustavna zems’ka gramota’ issued by great Lithuanian duke in their home policy. An author shows in his materials, that according to these documents ‘starosta’ was the main person at the time of legal proceedings.
Journal:Acta Historica Universitatis Klaipedensis
Volume 14 (2007): Baltijos regiono istorija ir kultūra: Lietuva ir Lenkija. Socialinė istorija, kultūrologija = History and Culture of Baltic Region: Lithuania and Poland. Social History, Cultural Sciences, pp. 9–23
Abstract
One of the greatest income items of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania were customs – ‘myta’. Initially customs played the role of compensation for using of the real estate such as bridges, dams etc. On the other hand customs were a form of payment for the right of trade license, ownership of the pot-houses (inn), and also for production and sale of the alcoholic drinks. The purpose of the given work is to reflect the activity of the Jewish customs officials as collectors of the customs duties and to show the incomes which were brought by this activity (on the example of the richest Jewish tax-farmer).
Pub. online:9 Dec 2007Type:IntroductionOpen Access
Journal:Acta Historica Universitatis Klaipedensis
Volume 14 (2007): Baltijos regiono istorija ir kultūra: Lietuva ir Lenkija. Socialinė istorija, kultūrologija = History and Culture of Baltic Region: Lithuania and Poland. Social History, Cultural Sciences, pp. 5–8
Journal:Acta Historica Universitatis Klaipedensis
Volume 13 (2006): Studia Anthropologica, II: Defining Region: Socio-cultural Anthropology and Interdisciplinary Perspectives, Part 2, pp. 171–177
Journal:Acta Historica Universitatis Klaipedensis
Volume 13 (2006): Studia Anthropologica, II: Defining Region: Socio-cultural Anthropology and Interdisciplinary Perspectives, Part 2, pp. 169–170
Pub. online:20 Dec 2006Type:Book ReviewOpen Access
Journal:Acta Historica Universitatis Klaipedensis
Volume 13 (2006): Studia Anthropologica, II: Defining Region: Socio-cultural Anthropology and Interdisciplinary Perspectives, Part 2, pp. 159–167
Journal:Acta Historica Universitatis Klaipedensis
Volume 13 (2006): Studia Anthropologica, II: Defining Region: Socio-cultural Anthropology and Interdisciplinary Perspectives, Part 2, pp. 151–157
Abstract
During my anthropological fieldwork in Estonia in 1996–97 I approached various folkloristic traditions and practices at several occasions. My meeting with folklorists and their practices can be described as a ‘clash’ between academic disciplines. As an anthropology student I obviously reacted to how folklorists related to their research material. It is probably often so when people from different disciplines meet, that disagreements will arise about how research is done and fieldwork material is interpreted. Somehow we have to accept these differences, but sometimes it is also inspiring to get to know what people from other disciplines think about your own discipline. I want to give an account of folkloristic practices as seen through the eyes of an anthropologist. And it is related to a particular time and place: Estonia in the 1990ties at the time of my fieldwork. I guess, and I know, that changes have occurred since then, but I still hope that these reflections can be of interest.
Journal:Acta Historica Universitatis Klaipedensis
Volume 13 (2006): Studia Anthropologica, II: Defining Region: Socio-cultural Anthropology and Interdisciplinary Perspectives, Part 2, pp. 141–149
Abstract
The human beings use to ascribe themselves and others to certain groups and dividing world for ‘them’ and ‘us’. We should rethink the role played by ethnicity concept in social sciences, common sense knowledge and practice in contemporary world. But the turn from ethnic or national identities to other ones is just the first step in my opinion. The second step in the same direction is to try to answer the question: does it really make sense for sociologists and anthropologists to investigate identities or we rather have to investigate people’s action and their behaviour? Moreover, if only we agree on these points we have to re-think the role that scholars play in the process of interpretation of the world by modern people, because the interpretations that we produce as ‘experts’ do not exist only in an ‘academic world’. They are in use by ordinary people as well as by politicians, and that is why those interpretations have visible practical consequences. Hereby I would like to discuss possible alternatives to ethnically based understandings of the issues of the ‘ethnicity’, ‘identity’ and ‘multiculturalism’. I’ll start with the description of the research experience that made me concerned about the issues pointed out.