Nuo Daumanto iki Gedimino. Ikikrikščioniškos Lietuvos visuomenės bruožai

LTRašant šį darbą buvo stengiamasi apčiuopti pačias bendriausias visuomenės vystymosi tendencijas. Šaltinių tam nebuvo labai daug, todėl dažnai naudotasi duomenimis apie Baltijos regione gyvenusius lietuvių kaimynus. Daugeliu atvejų tai galbūt yra pateisinama: Baltijos regiono tautos gyveno toje pačioje gamtinėje aplinkoje, tarpusavyje bendraujant dažnai kildavo būtinybė, kad ir kaimynai suvoktų, kas norima parodyti konkrečiu veiksmu. Darbe neretai buvo ieškoma universalizmų, ne visada atsižvelgiant, kad kiekvienas etnosas buvo savotiškai unikalus. Tai yra didelis darbo trūkumas, bet jo išvengti man, deja, nepavyko. Šiam darbui naudota šaltinių bazė buvo tradicinė: XIII a. Vokiečių ordino kronikos, aktai, įvairių keliautojų, buvojusių Lietuvoje, palikti kelionių aprašymai. Išsamesnį jų aptarimą galima rasti bet kuriame darbe, analizuojančiame XIII-XV a. įvykius Lietuvoje. Dėl šios priežasties netenka prasmės detalus šaltinių aptarimas. Apsiribosime tik trumpai pažymėdami: daugiausia informacijos apie lietuvių visuomenę aptariamuoju laikotarpiu pateikia Henriko Latvio, Livonijos eiliuotoji, Petro Dusburgiečio kronikos, t. y. tų šaltinių autoriai, kurie vieni pirmųjų susidūrė su baltais ir kuriems baltų visuomenė dar buvo naujas dalykas. Nors bandymas aptarti lietuvių ikikrikščioniškąją visuomenę yra pirmasis lietuvių istoriografijoje, vis dėlto turime pažymėti, kad kai kurios čia gvildenamos temos gana gerai nušviestos lietuvių istorikų [p. 4-5].

ENThe main aim of „From Daumantas to Gediminas“ is to outline the development of Lithuanian society and its structures in the thirteenth and fourteenth centuries. The book attempts to chart developments in Lithuanian society, social structures and ideology following the creation of the Lithuanian polity in the early thirteenth century. It deals with problems facing warriors in the Grand Duchy, the formation of a political nation and the influence of foreign policy on developments within Lithuania. Sections are devoted to each of these questions. Section One: "The social structure of pre-Christian Lithuania". This section discusses the basic social strata within Lithuania, the dynamics of social development and interaction, and the ways in which members of the various groupings regarded one another. As we investigate the formation of social groups within Lithuania at the beginning of the thirteenth century, we are often faced with the question of definition. For example, it is not always clear where we should place the boundary between prince (or duke) and noble, or between noble and the wealthier members of the non-noble class. Often generally accepted criteria, such as the right to inherit property, the size of property, or life style are not by themselves sufficient to define membership of a particular estate. In this study one more criterion is introduced, for the Author is of the opinion that, often when deciding to which social stratum an individual belonged, the attitude of other members of that group towards their fellow can be of considerable use. However, it should be borne in mind that this criterion is not always helpful, since Lithuanian social structures had not fully developed, especially in the thirteenth century. Often there are no clear indications which define membership of a particular estate.As regards the princely and ducal estate, this began to form at the turn of the twelfth and thirteenth centuries and from the beginning of the fourteenth there was only one family in Lithuania, whose members had the right to call themselves 'princes'. This quite sudden development is borne out by the fact that, despite many disputes over the grand-ducal throne, power remained for all intents and purposes in the hands of one family, which expelled other powerful clans from Lithuania. The old princely lines ('dukes') which remained in Lithuania are an exception to this rule and, as a political force they played no significant role in Lithuanian life. It should also be noted that the process by which these princes were demoted was not the same everywhere in Lithuania. At the end of the thirteenth century, princes disappeared from Western Lithuania (Žemaitija), a region which enjoyed considerable political autonomy. Another tendency is noticeable from the second half of the fourteenth century: gradually the two highest social classes (princes [including dukes] and nobles) began to foster closer relations. Written records reveal how certain higher nobles became 'dukes'. At the same time we note a decrease in the political influence of the former princely estate. Nobles began to take over the functions previously held by princes. We see such developments even before Vytautas took the grand-ducal throne (at the end of the fourteenth century) and this tendency became more clearly defined by Vytautas' administrative reforms during the first half of the fifteenth century. An example from the 1360s should illustrate this point: the parvenu noble Goštautas was commander of the garrison at Veliuona whilst Prince Kestutis' son, Butautas (grandson of Gediminas) served as military chief of the Kaunas fort.As a result of Vytautas' reforms and the Charter issued by Jogaila in 1387, the nobility gained legal guarantees of their status. By 1400 the nobles commonly styled themselves 'boiars'. The frequent appearance of term in the written record confirms this legal development. The term nobiles is replaced by boyari. Of course, the juridical acts are not solely repsonsible for this development - the formation of the boiarate was a long drawn out process and 1387 is merely a scholarly convenience for dating the phenomenon. The position of the Lithuanian nobility changed significantly at the turn of the thirteenth and fourteenth centuries, when representatives of this class were selected by the grand dukes to serve in his retinue. Thenceforth their main occupation and source of income was war, and this distinguished them clearly from lower social classes. Differences between the lower classes and the nobility are clear from the beginning of the thirteenth century. Nevertheless, the social station of the nobles was not finally defined during that century. A nobleman could forfeit his lands and titles for failure to carry out decisions taken in public council. [...].