Klaipėdos universitetas

On 13 August 1949, in Užpelkiai Forest in northern Lithuania, on the border of the Grinkiškis and Baisogala rural districts in Radviliškis County, a battle by Lithuanian partisans that had a significant impact on the history of the Prisikėlimas (Resurrection) district took place. The leaders of the Lietuvos Laisvės Kovos Sąjūdis (Movement for the Struggle for Lithuania’s Freedom) operated in this district. Based on the approach of modern conflict archaeology, the authors of the article, helped by volunteers, determined the location of the Battle of Užpelkiai Forest (in the Grinkiškis rural district, Radviliškis County), and collected a lot of new archaeological and historical data, in order to reconstruct the progress of the attack by MGB (Ministry of State Security) troops and the partisan defence. By referring to complex research results, the article gives the surnames and duties in the organisation of all the partisans who participated, as well as the circumstances and progress of the battle. It shows the importance of the Battle of Užpelkiai Forest to the Lietuvos Laisvės Kovos Sąjūdis in 1949–1950. The case study of field research into the battle in the partisan war shows how complex historical and archaeological research complements the picture of the partisan war with facts and artefacts, clarifies or denies old interpretations, and leads us to new ones.

Since the second half of the 20th century, the phenomenon of warriors (fighters) as one of the most important components of Medieval warfare, has increased in popularity in Lithuanian historiography. Archaeologists and historians usually analyse Balt warriors differently, because of the different methodology and understanding of the development of the state; therefore, the genesis, functionality, structure and decay of warbands (supposedly, in the 14th century) are perceived very differently. This paper has three objectives: 1) descriptive research to revise different opinions on warriors between archaeologists and historians; 2) comparison to find similarities and differences in the understanding of warriors between the two disciplines; and 3) an analysis of the problems of the chronology, definition and arguments of warriors in works by Lithuanian archaeologists and historians. The article shows that the work of archaeologists and historians falls short of the method of comparison in analysing this development prior to the creation of military-social structures in Western and Central Europe. Also, only a few archaeologists and historians have attempted to define the meaning of the word ‘warrior’ within the social structures of Balt society.

The 13th and early 14th century was a time when Lithuania emerged as a grand duchy and became one of the biggest expansion forces in northeast Europe. Unfortunately, we have no information today about what the equipment of a Lithuanian warrior looked like at that time, except for archaeological data and poor historical sources. The aim of this article is to show that by using this apparently quite scanty information, we can create not only an image of the arms and armour used by a particular warrior; there is also a possibility to retrace specific features of warfare by Lithuanians. The search for analogues should not be limited to archaeology. Much information can be obtained from sources in the fine arts and applied arts. The analysis of Medieval art can be as important as research into weapons itself, because an archaeologically discovered object can easily be recognised in fine arts sources. However, this information should be analysed carefully, taking into account certain factors (the special conditions of Medieval art) that may cause the study to go in the wrong direction.

This paper discusses recent quantitative research on defence spending in interwar Lithuania, and provides a comparison between the burden of defence spending in Lithuania, Latvia, Estonia, Finland and Poland in 1924, 1938 and 1939, which are the only years with available data on the total expenditure in Lithuania. Although contemporary mainstream economic science does not consider the military sector as unproductive (it ‘produces’ security services), it still sees it as a burden to the economy, because defence spending decreases private consumption, along with private and public civil investment. Two indicators of this burden are discussed: the share of defence spending in total state spending, and the ratio of defence spending to gross national income (GNI) or gross domestic product (GDP). In recent research on defence spending in interwar Lithuania, only the size and changes in nominal expenditure have so far been measured, without taking into consideration changes in the purchasing power of the litas. The main findings of the application of the second indicator include the fact that among the Baltic countries (including Finland), the Latvian economy was most heavily burdened by defence spending in 1924–1925. On the eve of the Second World War, however, Lithuania became the leader.

On 17 March 1938, Warsaw delivered an ultimatum to Kaunas. After the 18 years of non-existent official diplomatic relations with Poland due to the occupation of Vilnius in 1920, Lithuania was forced to renew them. The acceptance of the ultimatum in Lithuania heavily influenced the prestige of the authoritarian regime, but opened a new stage in relations between Lithuania and Poland on the eve of the Second World War. In addition to the envoy extraordinary and minister plenipotentiary to Lithuania Franciszek Charwat, Poland appointed Leon Mitkiewicz (1896–1972) as its military attaché to the diplomatic mission in Kaunas. Having scrupulously documented his life and service, Mitkiewicz observed Lithuania both before and after his appointment. He also conducted numerous political-military analyses, trying to assess the direction of international and geopolitical events. The article gives an overview of Mitkiewicz’s notes on Polish-Lithuanian relations, and Lithuania and its war potential both before and after the 1938 ultimatum.

This article is devoted to an analysis of burials with weaponry from the Ostriv graveyard near the River Ros’, about 100 kilometres to the south of Kyiv in the Middle Dnieper area, excavated during 2017 and 2018. Weapons (axes, pila, sword pommels) were discovered in 11 burials, representing approximately 20% of the total number of burials, and about 60% of all male burials investigated in the graveyard. An analysis of the material from the graveyard (weapons and jewellery) refers burials to West Balt migrants: Old Prussians, Curonians and Skalvians. They probably protected hill-forts of Kyivan Rus’ in the Ros’ region. The archaeological finds were supported by historical sources: chronicles of Kyivan Rusʼ. They evidence about the activities of Yaroslav the Wise aimed at reinforcing the southern borders of Kyivan Rus’. But it is hard to say exactly when Yaroslav relocated West Balts to the region of the River Ros’. Nevertheless, according to written sources and archaeological material, it could be dated from 1030 to the middle of the 11th century.

One of the more interesting rituals that functioned in Old Rus’ for centuries is the custom of cross kissing (крестноe целованиe), accompanying legal processes, such as taking oaths, public obligations, writing legal deeds, or concluding peace treaties. The earliest records of this ritual are evidenced clearly by the earliest chronicles and references in documents from that era. Due to the chronological structure and character of this work, which is clearly defined in the title of the article, the author’s attention is focused on the initial period of its functioning, until the end of the 13th century, in relation to contacts between Old Rus’ (Ruthenia) and Livonia. From Livonia, the parties participating in this ritual were Catholic bishops, Teutonic Knights, councillors from Livonian towns (Riga, Viljandi, Tartu and others), and even ordinary merchants. From Old Rus’, they were also participants in governments, merchants and warriors. From the historical sources, it can be stated here that the ceremony of kissing the cross was used quite commonly in legal acts between Old Rus’ and Livonia.

Combat readiness is the state of the armed forces and their ability to carry out combat duties. Combat training was performed in the Lithuanian army during all the period of the existence of the independent state. However, at the beginning of the 1930s, a qualitative change in combat training could be noticed, and it was implemented even faster after the military modernisation of the army started in 1934–1935. Since the main indicator showing combat readiness is army exercises, this article aims to evaluate the Lithuanian army’s combat readiness after the 1934–1935 reorganisation. In order to achieve this aim, the joint field exercise that was executed at the Gaižiūnai training ground in the summer, and the strategic-scale training exercises carried out in the autumn, a large army field exercise, are analysed. The article discusses how the army evaluated the training, the skills, and the abilities of the armed forces necessary for the execution of combat tasks that were revealed during the exercise.

The article deals with the main types of social and military relations between the indigenous people and the new landlords that formed in the times of building and reinforcing the rule of the Teutonic Order in Warmia, a part of Prussia. These included military action and the military obligations of the indigenous people and their descendants in the 13th and 14th centuries. The issue is discussed in the context of the family ties of the Old Prussians. In the era of the conquest, and when building the territory of the Teutonic Order in Prussia, family rule over possessions was reinforced at the expense of other social relations. From the article, it is clear that the military potential of the Diocese of Warmia was supported mainly by the indigenous people, who were granted Kulm law and received other privileges. It also seems that Old Prussians not only fought alongside the Order (knights of the Old Prussian origin, small freemen, equites Prutheni), but also led the army of the diocese as bishopric vogts.