LTReikšminiai žodžiai: Atkūrimas; Partizanų bunkeriai; Partizanų slėptuvės; Paveldas; Paveldosauga; Heritage; Heritage protection; Lithuania; Lithuania, partisans, bunkers, underground, recovery; Partisan bunkers; Partisan hiding-places; Restoration.
ENPartisan war legacy is still looking for its place in Lithuanian heritage protection and management system. Although it has been more than two decades since the date when the partisan war history was recorded in the context of all cultural heritage of Lithuania, no clear perpetuation and inheritance status policy, which would allow to highlight work priorities, was formed. So arbitrary actions were taken – they were ideological, often without prejudice to the laws adopted, but harmful to the authentic sites and the surrounding environment. Partisan bunkers and dugouts are only a small part of partisan warfare sites, but from the beginning they have become a major attraction. Perpetuation, heritage legalization and restoration work of bunker and dugout sites by the year 2010 did not raise any major issues. During the period of 1991–2011, 37 bunkers and dugouts, and 10 imitative ones were restored in authentic places. After a thorough archaeological Daigėliškiai forest bunker research (leader G. Petrauskas) the restoration work related problems were made public known. When people on private initiative started to memorialize the former bunkers and dugouts, the authorities concerned did not do anything, so naturally from the very beginning of independence restoration the war heritage policy was formed not by professionals but amateurs.Restoration of bunkers and dugouts became an important part of the memorializing policy of public and private initiatives. The authentic places were chosen, so it was safely said that the restored bunkers corresponded to the former ones. Daugėliškiai forest bunker example shows that to reproduce authentically the bunker or dugout is a difficult task. Without in-depth historical and archaeological investigations the partisan warfare heritage sites are destroyed, the finds are kept in museums or private collections. So integration of archeology into partisan warfare research (in addition to archival and eyewitness memories) is another new source for a multifaceted look at this period. Struggle for freedom will acquire another form in the collective memory when partisan warfare sites are generally recognized as the research object, and there will be created a program of their preservation and educational activities. Turning to the closest environment and its history will strengthen the relationship and interest in the story significant to the nation. [From the publication]