Vytautas Magnus University Research Management System (VDU CRIS)





3. Mokslo žurnalai / Research Journals

Permanent URI for this communityhttps://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12259/261291

Browse

Search Results

Now showing1 - 10 of 89
  • research article[2007][S4][H005][9]
    Istorija, 2007, vol. 68, p. 21-29

    The article reviews the information about Kaunas and other towns of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania in the 17* century on the basis of cosmographic, travellers' memoirs and the information presented by a popular French newspaper „La Gazette". The first part of the article gives information about the most frequently visited and described Lithuania's regions. The second part explains how Kaunas' geographical situation was perceived by foreigners and how differently the city's name was used by them. The majority of travellers who came to Lithuania from Kraków, Warsaw, etc. aimed to visit Vilnius. Consequently, this place got most attention while other cities and towns of the Grand Duchy were scarcely mentioned. Nevertheless, we came across some descriptions concerning Gròdnò, dated by the end of 17th century, when joint Seyms of the Republic used to meet as well as Trakai and Tartar villages round Vilnius. Therefore the readers could have formed the impression that Lithuania was mainly inhabitated by Tartars, and there were only few towns, i.e. Vilnius, Trakai and Gròdnó. Though some authors named Gródnò as one of the most beautiful cities in the Grand Duchy of Lithuania, the prevailing opinion was that it was a miserable place not suitable for the joint meetings of the Polish-Lithuanian Seyms. All other places and regions, which were far away from the main road leading from Polish capitals to Vilnius, were not mentioned. Kaunas, which was relatively far away from Gròdnó-Vilnius road, was not an exception. Despite the fact that this city, situated alongside two main Lithuania's rivers, was an important economic centre, it was little known to Western Europe. Most often it was mentioned that it is situated on the confluence of two rivers - Nemunas and Neris. Throughout the whole 17th century it was called differently by Western authors, e.g. „Lawna" or „Kiow".[...]

      25  44
  • research article[2004][straipsnis) / Publication of science sources and science heritage (article) (L][H005][6]
    Kauno istorijos metraštis, 2004, no. 5, p. 315-320
      32  60
  • journal article[2004][apžvalginis, informacinis, enciklopedinis) / Article (survey, information, encyclopedic) (S8][H005][5]
    Kauno istorijos metraštis, 2004, no. 5, p. 331-335
      27  42
  • Item type:Publication,
    Užsienio valstybių diplomatinis korpusas Kauno kultūriniame gyvenime 1923-1940 metais
    [The diplomatic corps of foreign states in the cultural life of Kaunas in 1923-1940]
    research article[2002][S4][S002][14]
    Kauno istorijos metraštis, 2002, no. 3, p. 143-156

    Kaunas was a provisional capital of Lithuania in 1918-1940. Foreign embassies were located in the centre of the town and acted as representatives of cultural and political life of their own countries. The embassies of France, the USSR, Italy and Great Britain were especially noted for their cultural work. The French diplomats J. H. G. Padovani, R. Ristelhueber and G. F. C. Dulong had very close ties with the Lithuanian-French Society. These diplomats were honorary members of the Society; in addition, many other famous people belonged to the Society, A. de Bastard, B. Biržiškienė, L. Bour, V. Daugirdaitė-Sruogienė, S. Girdvainis, A. Giuntz, V. Gustainis, L. Karsavinas, A. Merkys, L. Prou, M. Riomeris, R. Schmittlein, and R. Vincent among them. The diplomatic corps and the members of the Lithuanian-French Society gave lectures and concerts and organized exhibitions and balls. The English diplomat T. H. Preston staged two ballet performances at the Musical Theatre of Kaunas. The Embassy of the USSR organized exhibitions and reviews of Soviet films; sometimes the Embassy gave private concerts and organized film reviews for selected groups of society. No doubt, the work of foreign embassies and cultural societies was very important for the history of Kaunas.

      41  117
  • Item type:Publication,
    Kauno pavieto ribų kaita : XVI a. vidurys - XVIII a. pabaiga
    [The changes of Kaunas district boundary in the middle of XVI and the end of XVIII century]
    research article[2002][S5][H005][7]
    Kauno istorijos metraštis, 2002, no. 3, p. 275-281

    In the middle of the 16th century on the territory of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania an administrative-territorial reform was carried out. The whole state was divided into 'vaivadijos', and these units were then divided into smaller administrative districts, called 'pavietas'. This reform was the first to define precisely and to separate the territory boundaries of pavietai and vaivadijos. Unfortunately, when a piece of land was ascribed to one or another pavietas, this was not marked on the maps. After the Commonwealth of Poland and Lithuania in 1569 and the first division of the Republic in 1772, the boundaries of the Grand Duchy were changed. In the first case the Grand Duchy lost southern territories, in the second it lost the vaivadijos of Vitebskas and Mstislaulis. The northern part of Polockas vaivadija and the eastern part of Minskas vaivadija were annexed by the Russian Empire. That is why the existing state of distribution did not satisfy the requirements of reality any more. In the autumn of 1791 a new territorial distribution statute of the Republic was adopted by the Parliament. From the 23 pavietai that existed in the Grand Duchy new 34 pavietai were formed. The reform touched the pavietas of Kaunas as well: from its territory an additional pavietas of Prienai was formed. Later, the parishes of Virbalis and Naumiestis, which previously belonged to the Duchy of Samogitia, were attached, and this changed the boundaries of Samogitia and Trakai vaivadija. We have to note that this reform, as well as many others that were adopted by the Seym, was short-lived.

      158  212
  • research article[2002][straipsnis) / Publication of science sources and science heritage (article) (L][H005][6]
    Kauno istorijos metraštis, 2002, no. 3, p. 343-348
      29  73
  • research article[2000][straipsnis) / Publication of science sources and science heritage (article) (L][H005][3]
    Kauno istorijos metraštis, 2000, no. 2, p. 211-213
      36  79
  • Item type:Publication,
    Kauno mokyklos XVI amžiuje
    research article[1998][S5][H005][11]
    Kauno istorijos metraštis, 1998, no. 1, p. 25-35
      70  138
  • research article[1998][straipsnis) / Publication of science sources and science heritage (article) (L][H005][5]
    Kauno istorijos metraštis, 1998, no. 1, p. 166-170
      53  122
  • Item type:Publication,
    Seniausi Kauno miesto tarybos laiškai iš valstybinio archyvo Torunėje fondų
    [The Oldest letters of Kaunas city council obtained from the funds of the state archives of Torun]
    research article[2005]
    Chorążyczewski, Waldemar
    Kauno istorijos metraštis, 2005, no. 6, p. 105-111

    Straipsnis analizuoja keturis Valstybiniame archyve Torunėje rastus laiškus. Seniausias su Kaunu neabejotinai susijęs dokumentas – tai Vilniaus kašteliono ir Kauno seniūno Sudovijaus Valmantaičio laiškas, datuotas 1453 metų lapkričio 22 diena. Laiškas adresuotas Kryžiuočių ordino maršalui. Jis jau yra publikuotas. Autorius mini ir apie 1400 m. rašytą laišką, tačiau jo autorystė yra ginčytina. W. Chorążyczewski nesutinka su M. Gumowskio ir E. Rimšos nuomone, kad šis laiškas galėjo būti rašytas Kauno miesto tarybos atstovų. Trečiasis straipsnyje minimas laiškas datuojamas 1490 metų rugsėjo 13 d. Jame Kauno miesto tarybos nariai įspėja Torunės miesto tarybą, kad Torunės laivai bus sulaikomi, jei tas pats bus daroma su kauniečių laivais. Vienok pats vertingiausias autoriaus nuomone yra 1511 m. sausio 8 d. Kauno miesto tarybos rašytas laiškas, kuriame prašoma Torunės miesto tarybos, kad Kaunan atvyktų Henriko Baucho draugai ir išvaduotų jo apdarus bei kita turtą, sulaikytą Gdansko pirklio Jokūbo Melmano, kuriam minėtas Bauchas buvo skolingas. Šis laiškas vertas dėmesio dėl dviejų priežaščių:1)turime mažai šio laikotarpio Kauno kanceliarijos pavyzdžių, 2) aktas parodo kaip Kauno miesto valdžia sprendė tokio pobūdžio reikalus. Pastarasis laiškas yra publikuojamas kaip straipsnio priedas.

      22  52