THE HIGHLAND BALTS

The Baltic Highlands form a rough curve around the southeastern littoral of the Baltic Lowlands, extending from modern northeastern Poland (the Masurian Lakes Region) through eastern Lithuania (Aukstaitija) and into eastern Latvia (the Latgale Highlands). These highlands form a rough border between the coastal Baltic lowlands and the Polish Plain (the easternmost outlier of the North European Plain) to the south, and the North Russian Plain to the east. The only significant break in the stretch of the Baltic Lowlands is the Samogitian Highlands, in western Lithuania (a.k.a., Zemaitija), which divided the ancient Balt cultural-linguistic region of Prussia from the Balto-Finnic region of Courland-Livonia. The Samogitian Highlands are separated from the Baltic Highlands by the Middle Lithuanian Wetland, and thus form a kind of island of higher, drier land in the midst of the coastal wetlands. The Baltic and Samogitian highlands are basically "high" only in relation to the "low" elevation of the Baltic Lowlands—the highest point in the Baltic Highlands is Aukštojas Hill, which rises a mere 964 feet above sea level. Nevertheless, the topography of these highlands was drier than that of the lowlands, more heavily forested and less broken by wetlands, and were interspersed with significant stretches of alluvial forest and grassland, especially in southeastern Lithuania (a.k.a., Aukstaitija) and southern Prussia (a.k.a., Yotvingia). The peoples of these regions, therefore, developed along slightly different lines from their lowland kin, both due to the need to adapt to the exigences of a different topography and, perhaps more importantly, due to their proximity to different foreign cultural influences. These different outside cultural infuences were provided by the West Slavic peoples of what would become Poland (particularly the Masurians/Mazovians, Polans, and Pomeranians) and the East Slavic peoples that would become part of the Russian state of Kievan Rus' (particularly the Dregovichs, Krivichs, and Radimichs). These peoples were in turn heavily influenced by steppe nomads like the Magyars, Bulgars, Turks, and Mongols, and as the Highland Balt federation of Lithuania expanded into what is today Belarus, western Russia, and western Ukraine (ca. 1236-1430 CE), these steppe influences became even more pronounced, while the language and culture of the coastal peoples were either extinguished or subsumed by the ascendant language and culture of the conquering crusaders. 

 

History of the Highland Balts

The Galindians (Old Prussian, Galindis; Latin, Galindae; Greek, Galindai; German, Galindite) and the Sudovians (Old Prussian, Sudawa; Latin, Soudini; Greek, Soudinoi; German, Sudowite) were the southernmost members of the Old Prussian linguistic group, but Slavic sources tend to refer to both peoples collectively, as the Jatvians/Jatvingians/Yotvians/Yotvingians (there are actually a dizzying number of different spellings used in Polish and Russian sources, but Yotvingians is probably the most common English transliteration). Ancient Latin and Greek sources, as well as Medieval Latin authors, generally treat the Galindians and Sudovians as distinct tribal groups, but many modern historians believe that they were likely two members of a regional federation known as the Yotvingians (which would explain why the Slavs tended to refer to them collectively)—this is supported linguistically by the fact that "Galindia" and "Sudovia" appear to be hydronyms (i.e., names derived from local waterways, which tie the groups referenced to specific geographical territories), while the term "Yotvingians" is derived from the name of a semi-legendary early Balto-Varangian chieftain named Játvígr (thus, Jatvingians = "descendants of Jatvigr," which implies a dynastic relationship). The theory is that the two peoples were semi-independent, loosely united by the Yotvingian Dynasty, and if that dynasty followed the regular Balt pattern, it is likely that it was a position to which its scions were elected, and it combined cultic ritual significance with war leadership, but the position probably had no direct administrative powers. If so, the parallels that may be drawn between the Yotvingians and Lithuanians would certainly be strengthened. Unfortunately, the Old Prussian dialect spoken by the Yotvingians became extinct in the sixteenth century, it was not a written language, and those foreigners that wrote about the Yotvingians left us with fairly terse accounts. The Galindians and Sudovians inhabited two adjacent regions in what is today the Masurian Lakes Region of northeastern Poland—the Galindians lived in the west, in-between the headwaters of the Alna/Lyna River and the Sniardwy Lake, and the Sudovians lived to the east of the Galindians, from the Sniardwy Lake to the Neman/Memel River. It is unknown to what degree the Yotvingians may have shared the material and cultural influences that the Vikings/Varangians had on the Coastal Balts prior to the eleventh century CE, but as the legend of Jatvigr and the Yotvingian Dynasty would seem to imply, they must have shared some of those influences. However, like the other Highland Balts, the Yotvingians were drawn (as both raiders and traders) toward the fertile plains to the south and east, and the wealthy and prosperous civilizations that were growing there, and thus were more-heavily influenced by the Slavs than their coastal kin from a much earlier date. The Yotvingians are first mentioned by name in Slavic historical annals in the tenth century CE (ca. 944-983 CE), when they were made tributary allies of the Principality of Kiev (an early Russian state), and they are also mentioned as fearsome mounted raiders in Poland (Polans and Mazuria), Galich-Volhynia (eastern Poland-western Ukraine), western Russia, and the Baltic Crusader States throughout the eleventh, twelfth, and thirteenth centuries (since the Coastal Balts did not field significant numbers of cavalry, this implies that at least in the military sphere the Yotvingians had more in common with the Lithuanians than with the Coastal Balts, despite their linguistic affinities to the other Prussian tribes). They were raided in return by the western crusaders from Prussia (the Teutonic Knights and their allies) and the dukes of Polish Masovia/Mazovia and Krakow (Polans), as well as the princes of Galich-Volhynia, and a severe defeat at the hands of an alliance between Boleslaw V, Duke of Krakow, and Shvarno Daniilovich, Prince of Galich, at the Battle of Brańsk (23-25 June 1264 CE) seems to have severely weakened the Yotvingians. The Krakow-Galich alliance devastated Yotvingia, killed the Yotvingian duke—Komata/Kumata—and carried off much plunder and slaves, but they did not occupy Yotvingia. Komata's successor—Skomantas/Komantas—attempted to rebuild Yotvingian power by forming an alliance with Lithuania, and he attempted to support the Great Prussian Uprising (ca. 1260-1274 CE) against the rule of the Teutonic Order in Prussia. However, the Teutonic Knights retaliated by invading Yotvingia (ca. 1280-1281 CE), and Komantas and three of his sons were forced to flee to Lithuania. Yotvingia was conquered and made a part of Teutonic Prussia, although large numbers of Yotvingians fled with their duke and his sons to Lithuania—where they were re-settled—and most of the remainder were deported by the Teutonic Knights to Prussia (ca. 1283 CE), where they were forced into serfdom. Yotvingia mostly reverted to wilderness, and became part of the thinly populated border region (grauden) that developed between the Baltic Crusader States, Poland, and Lithuania. Although Yotvingia ceased to exist as a socio-political entity, Komantas survived, and (ironically) he eventually defected from Lithuania to the Teutonic Order, was baptized as a Roman Catholic, and became a native Balt auxiliary commander for the Teutonic Knights (his sons became dukes of the Yotvingian expats in Lithuania).

 

To the east of the Yotvingians lay the territories of the Aukstaitijans (Lithuanian, "highlanders"), who dominated the central Baltic Highlands, and to the northeast of the Yotvingians lay the territories of the Zemaitijans (Lithuanian, "lowlanders"), both of whom are discussed in greater detail on the gallery page. Suffice it to say here that the Zemaitijans and Aukstaitijans spoke Eastern Balt dialects, akin to the dialects of the Latgallians, Selonians, Curonians, and Semigallians, but different from the Western Balt dialects spoken by the Old Prussians (including the Galindians and Sudovians). The meaning of the names of the Aukstaitijans and Zemaitijans can be misleading, but as described above, the Samogitian/Zemaitijan Highlands formed a kind of higher, drier island amidst the lowland wetlands that surrounded it on all sides, and were only "low" in comparison to the slightly higher Aukstaitijan highlands. In addition, the Zemaitijan urban center of Kaunas was established at the confluence of the Neuman and Neris rivers, in the Middle Lithuanian Wetland that divides the Zemaitijan and Aukstaitijan highlands, and by the period covered by this gallery it had become a major hub of commerce through the region by dominating river-borne traffic. Although most of the major Zemaitijan dukes maintained fortresses in the Samogitian Highlands, Kaunas was often considered the capital of Zemaitija, and its situation in the lowlands may also have played some role in the view that the Zemaitijans were "lowlanders." Although the grand dukes of Lithuania, all of whom were Aukstaitijan, usually maintained their capital at Vilnius, which lay upstream of Kaunas on a tributary of the Neris, Kaunas was also sometimes used as the grand ducal seat (or as a secondary capital). I think it is interesting to note that in addition to the other similarities that make it possible to view the Galindians, Sudovians, Zemaitijans, Aukstaitijans, Latgallians, and Selonians together as "Highland Balts," they all also seem to be paired in regional federations composed of several pan-tribal federations that enjoyed traditional alliances with one another—as discussed above, the Galindians and Sudovians were likely part of a regional federation called Yotvingia (perhaps named after a regional dynasty), and as discussed on the gallery page the Zemaitijans and Aukstaitijans formed a regional federation called Lithuania, but as we are about to see below, the Selonians and Latgallians also seem to have been paired in some fashion, and they were usually linked in the minds of contemporary writers. I tend to view this as further evidence of the strength of Slavic cultural influence on the Highland Balts, since these regional federations seem to imitate the structure of the Kievan Rus' state in particular (once again, this is discussed in greater detail on the gallery page), but also that of the early Polish states (Pomerania, Polans, Mazuria) and Galich-Volhynia.

 

The Latgallians and Selonians lived to the north of Lithuania (the Selonians lived north of Zemaitija, and the Latgallians lived in an arc of territory stretching from north of Selonia to north of Aukstaitija)—the Latgallians dominated much of the lands on the northern side of the Daugava River (the Latgale Highlands), while the Selonians shared the lands south of the Daugava with the Semigallians (the Semigallians lived in the alluvial lowlands of the lower Daugava, where it emptied into the Gulf of Riga, while the Selonians lived upstream on the northern edge of the Samogitian Highlands). As mentioned above, the Selonians and Latgallians were often linked in the minds of contemporary writers, although it is unclear whether this was because they had formed some sort of regional federation, and/or they spoke similar dialects, and/or they shared elements of Highland Balt culture (e.g., in the military sphere, their elites were primarily cavalrymen). The Latgallians and Selonians are first mentioned in historical sources in the eleventh century CE, although they are archeologically attested in the region as early as the fifth century CE. By the eleventh century, the Latgallians were internally divided into three polities—the Eldership of Talava, the Principality of Jersika, and the Principality of Koknese. Not much is known of the Selonians, although they are believed to have been dominated by the Latgallians, particularly by Koknese (but the evidence is far from certain). Jersika and Koknese were ports on the Daugava River that had been founded by the Varangians in the tenth century CE, and were subsequently (eleventh century) dominated by the Russian principality of Polotsk. Both principalities had a mixed Varangian-Latgallian-Polotskian princely dynasty that paid tribute to Polotsk and shared a military alliance with that Russian principality. The Latgallian population of both principalities had largely converted to the Orthodox Christian rite by the end of the eleventh century. Jersika was the larger of the two, encompassing most of what is today southeastern Latvia, while Koknese controlled a sliver of land on the western edge of Jersika. Under threat of invasion by the Livonian Brothers of the Sword during the Livonian Crusade (an order of crusading knights with a reputation for brutality), the prince of Koknese at that time—Vetseke/Vyachko—surrendered his principality to the Bishop of Riga—Albert—who gave him far more favorable terms than he was likely to get from the Sword Brethren (ca. 1205 CE). Half of Koknese was annexed by the Bishopric of Riga and settled by vassals of the bishop, noble Latgallians were granted fiefs, and commoners were enserfed, while the other half of Koknesean territory was granted back to Vetseke, who converted to Roman Catholicism and became a vassal of the bishop. Although Vetseke then helped the Sword Brethren to conquer the Selonians (ca. 1207 CE), in the following year he apostatized and rebelled, killing the missionaries and vassals of the bishop in Koknese and Selonia, and in retaliation the Sword Brethren invaded (ca. 1209 CE) and devastated Koknese. Most of the Koknesean Latgallians were killed and enslaved or forced to relocate to Livonia, where they became serfs, although Vetseke escaped to Novgorod, where he served as an auxiliary commander in Novgorod's war against the western crusaders for control of Estonia. Jersika faced a similar fate. The Jersikan prince—Visvaldis—had formed an alliance with an Aukstaitijan duke—Daugirutis—and they repeatedly attacked the newly established crusader settlements in Livonia between 1203 and 1208 CE. In 1209, the crusaders stormed the town of Jersika and captured Visvaldis' wife (the daughter of Daugirutis). Visvaldis escaped, but was forced to ransom his wife under similar terms to those given to Vetseke of Koknese (ca. 1211 CE)—Visvaldis converted to the Catholic Latin rite of Christianity, gave half his lands to the bishop of Riga, and received the other half back as a vassal of Riga. After his death in 1239 CE, Jersika was annexed outright by the Sword Brethren (Latgallian nobles were enfeoffed, commoners enserfed). The Eldership (Lithuanian, Seniunas) of Talava lay to the north of the lands of Jersika—Jersika dominated the southern Latgale Highlands, Talava the northern Latgale Highlands—in-between Jersika (to the south), Livonia (to the west), Estonia (to the north), and Russia (to the east). Like the other Latgallian principalities, we know the Talavans lived in this region from a much earlier time period, but in the case of the Talavans, they do not enter the historical record until the twelfth century (ca. 1179-1180 CE) when prince Mstislav Rostislavich of Novgorod campaigned in eastern Estonia and the Latgale Highlands and forced the Talavans to become tributary allies of Novgorod. At that time, a Latgallian elder named Talivaldis was recognized by Mstislav as chief of the Talavans, and he converted to the Orthodox Christian rite (we do not know to what extent the general populace was converted). In 1208 CE, Talivaldis converted to the Catholic Latin rite in order to seal an alliance with the Livonian Brothers of the Sword that allowed him to break his treaty with Novgorod and stop paying tribute to the Russians. Subsequently (ca. 1208-1224 CE), the Talavans, Sword Brethren, and Livonians from the Turaida federation worked together to detach the eastern Estonians from their domination by Novgorod (established by Mstislav of Novgorod at the same time he had defeated the Talavans). During this war, Talivaldis was captured by an Estonian raiding party from Ugandi (ca. 1215 CE), and he was tortured and then burned alive (probably as a sacrifice). He was succeeded in the leadership of the Talavan Latgallians by his two sons—Rameks and Varibuls—who shifted their allegiance from the Sword Brethren to the bishop of Riga (Albert). Together, the bishop's forces and the Talavans devastated the lands of the Ugandians, but Novgorod retaliated by sending an army from Pskov (a vassal-state of Novgorod) that devastated Talava (ca. 1216 CE). Nevertheless, the conquest of the Ugandi was completed by Albert by 1224 CE, and Talava was annexed by the bishopric of Riga and the Sword Brethren soon thereafter (Talava was divided into feudal fiefs, 2/3 of which owed allegiance to Riga, the other 1/3 to the Sword Brethren). The Latgallians of Jersika and Talava were mostly converted to the Catholic Latin rite by the 1220s, and they and the Livonian Turaidans made up the bulk of native auxiliaries (latrunculi or strutere) in the Livonian crusader armies of the thirteenth and early fourteenth centuries.

 

Military System of the Highland Balts

Although there are definite parallels between the military system of the Highland Balts and that of the Coastal Balts, the trajectory of the evolution of tactics and arms amongst the Highland Balts diverged somewhat from the practices of the Coastal Balts, especially during the Middle and Later periods. In reference to the Highland Balt military system, I still use three time periods for purposes of conceptualization—the Early Highland Balts (ca. 600-800 CE), the Middle Highland Balts (ca. 800-1000 CE), and the Later Highland Balts (ca. 1000-1283 CE). The military system of the Highland Balts does not seem to have been significantly different from that of the Coastal Balts during the Early period, but beginning in the Middle period we begin to see divergence—Varangian influence remained strong, but we see a growing Slavic influence, especially after the formation of the Kievan Rus' state (ca. 882-1240 CE) and various West Slavic states in what would become Poland. The primary difference between the military systems of the Coastal and Highland Balts after about 800 CE lay in the widespread adoption of cavalry warfare by the Highland Balts, as opposed to the use of horses primarily as military transportation among the Coastal Balts. Although it is true that the elites of both groups (i.e., the coastal and highland peoples) began to evolve a tradition that can be characterized as "mounted infantry," the coastal peoples tended to prefer to dismount to fight as shock infantry—using their bows to “soften up” enemy formations prior to a charge into hand-to-hand combat—and only seem to have reluctantly fought as cavalry, while the highland peoples seem to have been very comfortable fighting as cavalry wherever and whenever possible, and to have only reluctantly dismounted to fight—primarily as bowmen, with hand-to-hand combat clearly relegated to a secondary defensive role—when it was considered to be tactically expedient. This difference can largely be explained by several factors—the different topographies of the coastal and highland regions of the Baltics naturally lent themselves to different styles of warfare; the Coastal Balts were always in closer communication (through war and trade) with those powers that dominated the Baltic Sea, and were more heavily influenced by them, while the Highland Balts were always in closer communication with the plains-dwelling peoples of central and eastern Europe, and were generally more heavily influenced by them; and all of the Coastal Balt groups were eventually conquered by German and Danish crusaders, and their military systems were almost entirely subsumed by western feudal traditions, while the Lithuanian state was initially formed by the union of two Highland Balt groups—the Zemaitijans and Aukstaitijans—and later, despite having assimilated large numbers of refugees from other Balt groups (most of whom were highland peoples, although some were coastal peoples), the Lithuanian state expanded into Belarus, western Russia, and western Ukraine and consciously adopted some elements of the steppe-influenced Slavic military system in these regions.

 

I was at great pains trying to determine when I should stop treating the Zemaitijans and Aukstaitijans as separate regional federations and begin treating them collectively as Lithuanians, and in trying to determine at which point the Lithuanian military system would have diverged significantly from that of the Later Highland Balt period. Although there seems to have been a consolidation of territories under powerful warlord-dukes in Zemaitija and Aukstaitija between about 1000 and 1200 CE, no historical document explicitly references these regions as distinct regional federations until 1219 CE. It is apparent in that document (a treaty between Galich-Volhynia and a collective body of Zemaitijan and Aukstaitijan dukes) that already at that time (i.e., 1219) the dukes of Aukstaitija and Zemaitija had earlier recognized the need for military cooperation and had formed two regional federations, and these regional federations had also formed an alliance in which it was recognized that the Aukstaitijan dukes were "elder." We do not know when the two federations were formed or when they formed an alliance with each other (i.e., some time before 1219 CE). However, historical annals record a sharp uptick in Zemaitijan and Aukstaitijan coordinated mass raids on neighboring territories (the Baltic Crusader States, Rus', Poland, Galich-Volhynia) beginning about 1200 CE, and this would seem to indicate that some form of alliance between the dukes of each regional federation had been established (i.e., larger armies could only be the product of greater cooperation, and there is evidence of centralized leadership with common goals and directed strategies). Therefore, I propose to use 1200 CE as the dividing line between the Later Highland Balt military system (ca. 1000-1200 CE)—when Zemaitija and Aukstaitija were entirely distinct military-political entities—and the Early Lithuanian military system (ca. 1200-1300 CE). This political consolidation was not a firm one, and the two regions remained socially and culturally distinct, and sometimes politically independent, throughout the subsequent history of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania (ca. 1236-1569 CE). Zemaitija became the primary battleground between Lithuania and the Baltic Crusader States and was therefore highly militarized, it was the region where most of the Baltic refugees from other regions were settled and this created a melange of Baltic subcultures, and Zemaitija remained obstinately pagan long after the rest of Lithuania converted to Christianity. It really wasn't until 1236 CE that period texts make it clear that the Aukstaitijan duke, Mindaugas, emerged as a true centralizing figure, and he is usually credited as the founder of the grand duchy (he later declared himself king, but that title was abolished after his assassination). Nevertheless, as the grand duchy expanded into Belarus, western Russia, and western Ukraine (ca. 1236-1430 CE), and after the Mongols swept through eastern Europe (ca. 1236-1291 CE), the influence of the Russian, Polish, Turkic, and Mongolic political and military systems on those of Lithuania became pronounced. As with the transit from the Later Highland Balt to the Early Lithuanian period, it is difficult to pin-point an exact date for the transit from the Early Lithuanian to the Later Lithuanian period. Several sources claim that Mindaugas was so impressed by the Mongols that he consciously attempted to transform the Lithuanian military system to make it competitive with that of the Mongols. Primarily, this seems to have meant expanding the aristocracy—by conquering or annexing new lands that could be given to new lords in return for military service—and training and equipping tribal militias as light cavalry skirmishers. Unfortunately, we do not know exactly how Mindaugas did the latter (i.e., creating a mounted militia), or whether the story is apocryphal, but certainly after about 1250 CE Lithuanian armies are often described as having a majority of mounted troops—composite cavalry elites and a light cavalry militia of commoners—and large numbers of infantry are only mentioned when the Lithuanians were fighting in the lowlands or in sieges or when pressed into a defensive position on a given battlefield. Ironically, although almost all Lithuanian warriors continued to carry a bow and arrows, there is little evidence that either the noble or commoner cavalry forces adopted recurved or composite bows from the Turks and Mongols, and they are often described as preferring to use thrown spears/javelins/darts while mounted, and to have only used their bows when fighting on foot. The evidence is thin, and I have always suspected that it might be false (certainly there had to have been times when a Lithuanian cavalryman was tempted to use his bow from horseback), but until better evidence comes to light I don't think I can definitively reverse this historical analysis. By the time Lithuanian expansion into Slavic lands had kicked into high gear (ca. 1316-1430 CE), the Gediminid Dynasty (1315-1548 CE) of Aukstaitija had emerged as the overlords of all Lithuania, and each of the Gediminid dynasts took great pains to make sure that conquered/annexed Slavic lands fell under the authority of scions of the Gediminid line. This meant that Slavic influence again increased in Lithuania, but these changes were top-down and generally affected Aukstaitija first and Zemaitija second. The expansion of the noble class of military-political elites found its greatest expression in the development of an intermediary class of nobles between the dukes (kunigai), who were gradually becoming quasi-feudal potentates (beneath the grand duke in prestige but often very independent), and the upper class of commoners known as the free farmers (laukininkai), who formed the bulk of the mounted component of the militia. These middling nobles were known as bajorai (singular, bajoras), a term whose etymology is clearly linked to Russian titular (singular, bolyar, plural, bolyarin, and usually transliterated into English as "boyar"). The closest comparison to Medieval English rankings would be something like a count. Boyars are mentioned infrequently between about 1250 and 1300—mostly in reference to the principalities conquered/annexed from the Rus'—but after 1300 the title appears with increasing frequency throughout the growing Lithuanian hegemony, including the homelands of Aukstaitija and Zemaitija. As with the dukes, these boyars were expected to equip themselves and their retinue to a high standard that was increasingly similar to the druzhina of the princes of Kievan Rus'. However, membership in the boyar class was not strictly defined (neither was the class of dukes), and there appears to have been lesser boyars who were probably only slightly wealthier than the average lakininkai (indeed, the boyars were often lakininkai that had been elevated in social standing through the acquisition of wealth and success in war), and boyars who grew in wealth and power and rivaled the lesser dukes, while the majority of boyars lay somewhere in-between. Therefore, herein I use the Early Lithuanian period (ca. 1200-1300) as a kind of transitional period between the Later Highland Balt military system and the Later Lithuanian period (ca. 1300-1500 CE), when the transformative processes at that time affecting the political-military traditions of Lithuania reached their fruition. The Later Lithuanian period is the final military system covered by this gallery.

 

What this means for the Highland Balt military system is that during the Early period (ca. 600-800 CE) the military system of the various Highland Balt groups was substantially similar to that of the Coastal Balts, with dispersed, low population density communities that each fielded a small tribal militia (clan headmen and tribal warriors), with only occasional cooperation between tribes that could produce substantial armies (probably a maximum of 5,000 men). Elites during this early period would not have been greatly differentiated from the other members of the tribal militia in equipment, tactical stance, or outlook (and they probably fought alongside their men). During the Middle period (ca. 800-1000 CE), the trajectory of military evolution would have mostly continued to parallel that of the Coastal Balts, with a sharp increase in the development of pan-tribal federations that could field substantially larger armies (10-15,000 men), greater urbanization, the rise of a class of successful warlord-dukes who fought alongside well-equipped retinue warriors, and although Scandinavian influence on equipment and tactics would have been pronounced among the elites, Slavic influence was much heavier than it was among the coastal peoples, and dedicated cavalry became the norm with the highland elites (they still could dismount as infantry, but they clearly preferred to stay mounted whenever and wherever possible, and when on foot they clearly preferred a defensive posture with bows as the primary weapons, while the coastal elites had largely adopted shock infantry tactics). These mounted elites were generally what I would classify as Open Order Main Battle Cavalry (i.e., fighters who used hand-thrown missile weapons like spears, javelins, and darts to soften up enemy formations, but who were prepared to charge into hand-to-hand combat with sword, axe, and mace). Apparently, when they dismounted to fight, they preferred to use their bows as missile weapons, although they were still prepared to fight in hand-to-hand combat if necessary. The Later Highland Balt period (ca. 1000-1283 CE) partially overlaps with the Early Lithuanian period (ca. 1200-1300 CE)—the Aukstaitijans and Zemaitijans are only covered under the Later Highland Balt system until 1200 CE when, as I outlined above, we can perceive the development of an alliance between Zemaitija and Aukstaitija. This Lithuanian federation, precursor of the grand duchy, could field substantially larger armies (15-25,000 men) than those Highland Balt groups that continued to struggle against the crusaders elsewhere (the Yotvingians held on until 1283, the Latgallians only until 1224), although the basic features of the Early Lithuanian system would not have been substantially different from what they had been prior to about 1300, with one prominent exception—the development of a mounted militia of commoners to supplement the noble heavy cavalry after about 1250 (there were likely units of commoner light cavalry before this, but they were probably not very numerous and they were likely recruited on an ad hoc basis). Another addition to the Early Lithuanian system would have been the auxiliary border men (leitzlute) and allied or subject Rus' cavalry and infantry spearmen and archers recruited from those areas of Kievan Rus' annexed by Lithuania between 1236 and 1263 CE (the principalities of Grodno and Novgorodok). Finally, with the Later Lithuanian system we see the full development of the grand duchy's political framework—and the military system defined by that framework—with the grand duke and dukes reigning as territorial princes and fighting with very well-equipped mounted retinues; an emerging class of boyar gentry, the wealthiest and most powerful of whom likely fought with their own retinues, the middling members of which would likely have bulked out the retinues of the dukes and greater boyars, and the lesser members of which probably served alongside the most prosperous of the commoners in the mounted militia; and a broad class of free farmers/peasants, the most prosperous of whom likely formed the bulk of the mounted militia, while the remainder of the peasant class seems to have slipped into a military role similar to that of the Balt serfs in the Baltic Crusader States (basically a poorly equipped rabble). Appended to this system were mercenaries—primarily border men, but also Germans, Poles, and Russians—auxiliaries recruited from Balt refugee groups that had resettled in Lithuania, and the allied military manpower resources drawn from the Ruthenian principalities of Lithuania. During the Later Lithuanian Period, armies could be substantially larger—over 25,000 men—but this would have been exceptional. Throughout the history of the Baltics in the Medieval period, most armies remained relatively small—averaging around 10-15,000 men, but sometimes significantly less.