Acta Historica Universitatis Klaipedensis

This paper deals with concepts of images of ethnic minorities in the ideologies of the Lithuanian Riflemen’s Union, the Latvian Aizsargi, and the Estonian Kaitseliit, with the aim of identifying factors that predetermined qualitative changes in these images in the different periods of activity of these paramilitary organisations. In addition, possible functions of the images of ethnic minorities in the ideologies of the Lithuanian, Latvian and Estonian riflemen are analysed. The study is based on the presumption that, in the ideologies of the Lithuanian Riflemen’s Union, the Latvian Aizsargi and the Estonian Kaitseliit, the formation of the images of ethnic minorities in the different periods of activity of these organisations (the struggles for independence, the formation of the parliamentary system, authoritarian coups and presidential power, and national political crises) was predetermined by the practice of attaching ethnic groups to the relative camps of allies or foes, and by the policy of dividing ethnic minorities into groups of ‘reliable’ and ‘unreliable’.

This article discusses the process of the integration of the Lithuanian Riflemen’s Union (LRU) into the state’s defence system in the 1920s and 1930s. The key features and boundaries of the process are outlined, on the basis of archival materials and research literature. An analysis of relations between the military authorities and the LRU reveals individual characteristics of the relationship between the riflemen and the army. The regional context of the process is evaluated within the limitations of the sources available, by presenting the situations of similar paramilitary organisations in Latvia, Estonia, Finland and Poland during the period in question.

The paper analyses the relations between the Lithuanian Riflemen’s Union (LRU) and the diaspora in the USA, established at the very beginning of the LRU’s activity. It aims to show the plans for collaboration with Lithuanian Americans, the specifics of fundraising, and the aim of the riflemen to improve their material status by means of financial support from Lithuanian Americans. The controversial fundraising mission to America by the painter Antanas Žmuidzinavičius, the LRU’s representative, in 1922 and 1923, is investigated. On the basis of unpublished archive documents, the paper addresses the circumstances of the organisation and implementation of Žmuidzinavičius’ mission, the suspicions about its transparency, and the investigation into it.

During the struggle for Lithuania’s independence, defence and guerrilla units started forming in the countryside, and fought against the Bermontian and Soviet forces and gangs of marauders. In 1919, intellectuals and public servants from Kaunas formed a sports-military guerrilla organisation, and called it the Lithuanian Riflemen’s Union (LRU). The organisation accepted not only new members, but also people who had already fought with guerrilla units in northeast Lithuania. Therefore, the ranks of the LRU grew rapidly, and the new paramilitary organisation played an important role in the struggle for Lithuania’s statehood. The LRU was active throughout the interwar period, until 11 July 1940, when, after the Soviet occupation, it was officially disbanded. This paper deals with issues of the scope and structure of the LRU, which until now have hardly been dealt with in historiography. The paper has three objectives: 1) it tries to establish changes in the numbers of riflemen in the interwar period, as well as the numbers of people who belonged to the LRU in different periods, and their total number throughout the interwar period; 2) the ethnic, religious and social composition of the Riflemen’s Union is analysed, with the aim of developing ‘a social portrait of a rifleman’; and 3) the internal structure of the Union is addressed: the numbers of reserve and combatant riflemen.

For the first time in Lithuanian historiography, this paper examines the theories of guerrilla warfare formulated by Polish military theorists, such as Karol Bogumił Stolzman, Piotr Wysocki, Henryk Kamieński and Ludwik Adam Mierosławski, and analyses the links between Polish paramilitarism and the origins of the Lithuanian Riflemen’s Union, and the formation of the ideological views of the Lithuanian Riflemen’s Union, given the experience of similar organisations in East-Central Europe (Sokol, Suojeuskunta), and the links between the Lithuanian Riflemen’s Union and the paramilitary movements formed in the 19th and early 20th centuries.