Johann Jacob Quandt (1686–1772) ist eine der hervorragendsten Persönlichkeiten Preussens im 18. Jahrhundert. In der litauischen Literatur- und Kulturgeschichte ist er als aktiver Anreger des litauischen Schrifttums, vor allem religiösen, bekannt. Die ersten Vertreter der Familie Quandt findet man in Preussen schon zur Zeit der Reformation. Johann Jacob Quandt studierte an der Königsberger Universität zu der Zeit, als Kurfürstentum Preussen zu einem Königreich wurde. Das war das wichtigste politische Erreigniss in diesem Lande seit der Einführung der Reformation. Demzufolge erlebte die alte Albertina ihre Wiedergeburt. Nach Königsberg drangten sich die Ideen der Aufklärung, die akademische Jugend wurde mit den Problemen der puren deutschen Spache konfrontiert, die Pfarrer der litauischen Gemeinden begannen die erste philologische Polemik wegen der Normierung der litauischen Schriftsprache. Der König von Preussen Friedrich der I. förderte die Herausgabe der litauischen religiösen Bücher, die zur Glaubensfestigung der Bevölkerung dienten. 1701–1706 erschienen fünf litauische Bücher. Unter den Theologiestudenten, den Altersgenossen von J. J. Quandt, fanden sich die der litauischen Sprache kundigen künftige Übersetzer der litauischen religiösen und weltlichen Bücher. Die schöpferische Kräfte waren dabei, der Bedarf an religiösem Schrifftum, insbesondere an der litauischen Bibel, wuchs, die Situation zur Herausgabe der Bücher angesichts der Preussischen Regierung war äußerst. [der volle Text, siehe weiter]
Johann Jacob Quandt (1686–1772) ist eine der hervorragendsten Persönlichkeiten Preussens im 18. Jahrhundert. In der litauischen Literatur- und Kulturgeschichte ist er als aktiver Anreger des litauischen Schrifttums, vor allem religiösen, bekannt. Die ersten Vertreter der Familie Quandt findet man in Preussen schon zur Zeit der Reformation. Johann Jacob Quandt studierte an der Königsberger Universität zu der Zeit, als Kurfürstentum Preussen zu einem Königreich wurde. Das war das wichtigste politische Erreigniss in diesem Lande seit der Einführung der Reformation. Demzufolge erlebte die alte Albertina ihre Wiedergeburt. Nach Königsberg drangten sich die Ideen der Aufklärung, die akademische Jugend wurde mit den Problemen der puren deutschen Spache konfrontiert, die Pfarrer der litauischen Gemeinden begannen die erste philologische Polemik wegen der Normierung der litauischen Schriftsprache. Der König von Preussen Friedrich der I. förderte die Herausgabe der litauischen religiösen Bücher, die zur Glaubensfestigung der Bevölkerung dienten. 1701–1706 erschienen fünf litauische Bücher. Unter den Theologiestudenten, den Altersgenossen von J. J. Quandt, fanden sich die der litauischen Sprache kundigen künftige Übersetzer der litauischen religiösen und weltlichen Bücher. Die schöpferische Kräfte waren dabei, der Bedarf an religiösem Schrifftum, insbesondere an der litauischen Bibel, wuchs, die Situation zur Herausgabe der Bücher angesichts der Preussischen Regierung war äußerst. [der volle Text, siehe weiter]
The strategy of research into the dissertation object is based on four criteria. First, it is a study of a phenomenon and its development. Second, the study is not confined to the present territory of the Republic of Lithuania. Third, the research problem and questions raised are interpreted in a broader light of examples from the European historiography, which enable to contextualise past features of the local social reality and search for similarities and/or differences as well as common points in the development of the phenomena which existed in different regions. Fourth, the object under analysis is perceived as a phenomenon with a multifaceted structure. Therefore, an attempt is made to look for new theoretical approaches rather than limit oneself to a traditional historical narrative. Historiography has seen attempts to disclose the development of society, uneven social structure, its specific features, etc. through the analysis of one phenomenon. However, this is only possible by looking at that phenomenon from different perspectives and analysing it as a product of different spheres of social reality, because focusing on a single aspect of the phenomenon limits the possibilities for interpretation which would reveal the multifunctional nature of the phenomenon and uneven trajectories of its development. The phenomenon of the castle is one of those problems which has not been analysed systematically and consistently. The existing historiography has mostly perceived the castle as unrelated to the social environment or political circumstances and, therefore, it was frequently presented as a military or architectural object. The castle is defined as a structure comprising three aspects: territory (a), society (b), power-authority (c). The castle is perceived as a nucleus which is uniting and forming a territory; this territory was eventually transformed into a legally, administratively and economically subordinate territory with clearly defined boundaries. It consisted of various social categories defined by different subordination-dependency, including individuals of peasant and non-peasant origin, in such a way forming the castle society, its social organisation. In these territorial and social planes of the castle as a local structure unfolded the power-authority hierarchy with its subjects. The castle was that element of medieval society which concentrated power and helped separate powerful subjects establish their authority over a certain territory and its population. Therefore, from the sociological point of view, the castle performed the roles of symbolic (ideological) and real (direct) authority and a representative of justice in the society of its time. The castle is interpreted as a power-authority structure which was unfolding and creating a specific territory with a subordinate social environment. The dissertation consists of an introduction, four parts, conclusions, a list of sources and literature, and appendices. All sections and their subsections express the structuralist approach toward the problem under analysis which is perceived and interpreted in the comparative perspective of the whole study. The first part attempts to formulate a definition of the castle phenomenon as manifold and changing in time and describe the concept in the European context. The second part constructs the model of the castle territory. It presents the conception of different constituents of the external territory of the castle. This model is based on the examples of European historiography devoted to the problem of the castle. The relationship of the castle with other territorial structures (e.g., village, manor) is analysed in this part as well. The third part investigates the office-bound character of the castle, its (local) society, social groups which belonged to the castle (e.g., unfree peasants, peasant performing military service such as barčiai, keliuočiai, etc.). The social characteristics of the castle (e.g., administration, economy) is analysed from the perspective of the GDL regionalism and in relation to the castle territory. The fourth part analyses the subordination-dependency problem of the castle. Different forms of subordination-dependency are identified (nominal, real, fief, office-bound, mortgage) depending on the socio-political circumstances and their changes are explained. Besides, the typology of castle subordination-dependency is provided by distinguishing the sovereign (state) (a), dynasty (b), church (c), dukes (d), nobility (e), gentry (f).
The strategy of research into the dissertation object is based on four criteria. First, it is a study of a phenomenon and its development. Second, the study is not confined to the present territory of the Republic of Lithuania. Third, the research problem and questions raised are interpreted in a broader light of examples from the European historiography, which enable to contextualise past features of the local social reality and search for similarities and/or differences as well as common points in the development of the phenomena which existed in different regions. Fourth, the object under analysis is perceived as a phenomenon with a multifaceted structure. Therefore, an attempt is made to look for new theoretical approaches rather than limit oneself to a traditional historical narrative. Historiography has seen attempts to disclose the development of society, uneven social structure, its specific features, etc. through the analysis of one phenomenon. However, this is only possible by looking at that phenomenon from different perspectives and analysing it as a product of different spheres of social reality, because focusing on a single aspect of the phenomenon limits the possibilities for interpretation which would reveal the multifunctional nature of the phenomenon and uneven trajectories of its development. The phenomenon of the castle is one of those problems which has not been analysed systematically and consistently. The existing historiography has mostly perceived the castle as unrelated to the social environment or political circumstances and, therefore, it was frequently presented as a military or architectural object. The castle is defined as a structure comprising three aspects: territory (a), society (b), power-authority (c). The castle is perceived as a nucleus which is uniting and forming a territory; this territory was eventually transformed into a legally, administratively and economically subordinate territory with clearly defined boundaries. It consisted of various social categories defined by different subordination-dependency, including individuals of peasant and non-peasant origin, in such a way forming the castle society, its social organisation. In these territorial and social planes of the castle as a local structure unfolded the power-authority hierarchy with its subjects. The castle was that element of medieval society which concentrated power and helped separate powerful subjects establish their authority over a certain territory and its population. Therefore, from the sociological point of view, the castle performed the roles of symbolic (ideological) and real (direct) authority and a representative of justice in the society of its time. The castle is interpreted as a power-authority structure which was unfolding and creating a specific territory with a subordinate social environment. The dissertation consists of an introduction, four parts, conclusions, a list of sources and literature, and appendices. All sections and their subsections express the structuralist approach toward the problem under analysis which is perceived and interpreted in the comparative perspective of the whole study. The first part attempts to formulate a definition of the castle phenomenon as manifold and changing in time and describe the concept in the European context. The second part constructs the model of the castle territory. It presents the conception of different constituents of the external territory of the castle. This model is based on the examples of European historiography devoted to the problem of the castle. The relationship of the castle with other territorial structures (e.g., village, manor) is analysed in this part as well. The third part investigates the office-bound character of the castle, its (local) society, social groups which belonged to the castle (e.g., unfree peasants, peasant performing military service such as barčiai, keliuočiai, etc.). The social characteristics of the castle (e.g., administration, economy) is analysed from the perspective of the GDL regionalism and in relation to the castle territory. The fourth part analyses the subordination-dependency problem of the castle. Different forms of subordination-dependency are identified (nominal, real, fief, office-bound, mortgage) depending on the socio-political circumstances and their changes are explained. Besides, the typology of castle subordination-dependency is provided by distinguishing the sovereign (state) (a), dynasty (b), church (c), dukes (d), nobility (e), gentry (f).
