Acta Historica Universitatis Klaipedensis

Although the section of the Baltic seashore near Palanga was ceded to Lithuania under the Treaty of Melno, it remained strategically important to the Teutonic Order. From the Middle Ages, the coastal strip of the starostwo of Žemaitija in the Grand Duchy of Lithuania served as a land route connecting the Teutonic Order’s domains in Prussia and Livonia. This article focuses on the dynamics of travel along this route in 1519–1521 when the Teutonic Order was at war with Poland. Although the theatre of war covered areas of Prussia in the triangle between Königsberg, the River Vistula and Mazovia, military escorts used the stretch of land around Palanga to transport messages, carts of ammunition, and soldiers. Mercenaries disguised as merchants, undercover messengers, and sometimes even large formations of soldiers, crossed the coastal strip. Due to the geopolitical situation, the Žemaitijans failed to cut off this movement completely: the Grand Duchy of Lithuania tended to turn a blind eye, and formally adhered to the ‘eternal peace’. This article is the first attempt to shed a light on the role that the Palanga nexus of interaction between Prussia and Livonia played in the 1519–1521 war. It shows the specific participants, the route, and the circumstances of travel through this nexus.

Although Janusz Radziwiłł (1612–1655), the Voivode of Vilnius and Grand Hetman of Lithuania, managed to acquire the Tauragė estate on the Lithuanian border with Prussia in the early 1650s, it was just before his death. His granddaughter Ludwika Karolina (1667–1695), who inherited the titles from his daughter Anna Maria (she passed away at an early age), was raised in Berlin and married the son of the Elector Friedrich Wilhelm (1620–1688) there in 1681. The Elector of Brandenburg decided to use this connection to renew his claim to the Tauragė estate (his father Georg Wilhelm had sold it in 1639). In 1688, Ludwika Karolina signed a document in Potsdam renouncing her inheritance rights to the Tauragė estate in favour of the Elector, and this was confirmed in 1691 by a court in Lithuania. Manfred Hellmann, who published a study on Prussian control of Tauragė in 1940, revealed the ambiguity that arose as a result: although Tauragė continued to belong to the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth, it was in fact controlled by Prussia, whose monarch became the owner of private land in the Commonwealth and had to pay the usual taxes and duties there. The article examines whether or not this political ambiguity was reflected in the depiction of the Tauragė estate on 18th-century maps. The research shows that this depiction was equally ambiguous: while some maps showed Tauragė as a part of Prussia, others did not emphasise the connection at all, continuing to show that the estate belonged to the Grand Duchy of Lithuania.

Schmalleningken (in Lithuanian Smalininkai) was a village consisting of three parts on the Prussian-Lithuanian border until 1795. It served as a customs office for the Kingdom of Prussia in the 18th century, and was an important cross-border transit point for both water and land traffic. At the Third Partition of the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth, the lands to the east of the village on the right bank of the River Nemunas were taken over by Russia, while those on the left bank became part of Prussia, which established the province of New East Prussia there. The Congress of Vienna restored the previous configuration of the border, with the only difference being that Lithuania’s place as Prussia’s neighbour was taken over by the Russian Empire, part of which on the left bank was the Kingdom of Poland. This article examines the various institutions and actors that operated in this border area, located at the intersection of three political entities, during both this transitional period and the subsequent years leading up to the Crimean War. The aim is to show what kind of contacts took place there, what forms they took, and what changes the microcosm of Schmalleningken underwent in the early 19th century. The article explores who contributed to this, and what significance the town of Jurbarkas, located on the other side of the border, had in this contact zone. It shows the role of the Christian and Jewish populations, with their somewhat different goals. Although their cultural practices differed, their interaction was based on a common understanding of the role of a nexus on the border. This role was primarily to provide services for cross-border traffic by land and on the River Nemunas, and to promote cross-border trade.

The research note briefly presents the context of the description of the Battle of Durbe in 1260 in sources, focusing on the Livonian and Prussian traditions in representing the battle. The author specifically compares the description in the late 13th-century Livonian Rhymed Chronicle with the description by Peter of Dusburg, which shaped the Prussian tradition in the first half of the 14th century.

The work provides a translation of the report on the trade situation and statistics of the Baltic Sea ports of Klaipėda, Königsberg, Elbing, Gdansk and Szczecin (belonging to Prussia at the time) in 1863, prepared by the Ottoman Consulate General in Gdansk in early 1864, and sent by the envoy of the Ottoman Empire in Berlin to the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Ottoman Empire. This is the only document of this type on the Baltic Sea ports in the 19th century so far found in Turkish archives prepared by the diplomatic missions of the Ottoman Empire, which gives us an insight into the trade situation and statistics of the Baltic Sea region. In the document, a brief descriptive contextual assessment of trade, as well as the main export and import statistics, are provided in evaluating each city. Additionally, the document also provides information about the role of Klaipėda port in Baltic Sea trade in the middle of the 19th century.