How Rus' became Lithuanian

152
How Rus' became Lithuanian
Gedimin, Olgerd and Vitovt at the Millennium of Russia monument. Sculptors M. Mikeshin, I. Schroeder and architect V. Hartman. 1862


After the Tatar-Mongol invasion in the western and southern parts of Ancient Rus', exactly the same social processes took place as in the northeast. Interaction and communication between the Russian lands continued. Kyiv, despite the fact that it fell into complete desolation, for some time was still considered the "golden table" of Rus' and was constantly in the orbit of attention of the princes of the northeast.



The right to the capital of the Russian state was always supported and defended by the grand dukes of the northeast, even when Kyiv and the surrounding territories were occupied by Lithuania, and then became part of the Commonwealth.

irreparable damage


The Tatar-Mongol invasion caused enormous damage to these lands. From the analysis of the researcher A. A. Gorsky, it follows that only 31% of the settlements were restored in the Galicia-Volyn land, and 22% of the settlements in the Kyiv land. Southern and western Rus' was on the direct route to Europe, where the nomads were aimed, therefore both destruction and pogroms were significant here. In addition to the destruction of cities or the general massacre of the population, as in the city of Berestye, which was also in the Vladimir-Suzdal land, the Tatars drove the male population into hashar (in Persian - the crowd), which was spent as cannon fodder in battles and sieges. Master Rogerius (d. 1266) wrote about the Russians, Hungarians and Cumans used in this way.

“... the Mongols carried out a great massacre in the land of Russia, destroyed cities and fortresses and killed people,” wrote eyewitness Giovanni del Plano Carpini, “besieged Kiev, the former capital of Russia, and after a long siege they took it and killed the inhabitants of the city: from here, when we driving through their land, we found innumerable heads and bones of dead people lying in the field; for this city was very large and very crowded, and now it is turned into almost nothing: there are barely two hundred houses there, and they keep those people in the most difficult slavery.

The constant threat from the close Horde aggravated the position of the region, however, as well as the north-east of Rus'. A small territory of the "Russian Land", part of the steppe territory of the Chernigov and Pereyaslav principalities, became part of the Horde directly.

In the west of Rus', Russian princes in the period from the 1201th to the beginning of the 1263th century, following the economic and military weakening of the cities, spent their military potential on achieving personal benefits, honors and momentary benefits. When the Mongols besieged and stormed the cities of Volyn, Prince Daniel with his son and brother was in Poland. Prince Daniil Romanovich (1279-1280) was equal in strength and power to Yaroslav Vsevolodovich and his son Alexander. After the Mongol invasion, he was able to gather under his rule the Galician, Volyn, part of the Kyiv and Turov-Pinsk lands. His son, Lev Danilovich in XNUMX (XNUMX) tried to capture the whole of Lesser Poland, historical center of Poland. But the descendants of Daniel, and in general the Russian princes in these lands, remained in the paradigm of pre-Mongolian reality, being engaged exclusively in campaigns and the extraction of tribute from neighboring lands. While historical necessity required the creation of new state structures, as happened in the northeast of Rus'.

But if only the Tatars were an external enemy there, the west of Rus' (modern territories of Belarus and Ukraine) was also threatened by neighboring state formations, such as Hungary and Poland, but especially the Lithuanian tribes uniting at that time. Coincidentally, they were at the stage of transition from tribal to territorial-communal system.

Russian volosts were undermined by Tatar raids and tributes, the loss of external sources of income from foreign neighbors. The Russian princes and their squads lost their source of livelihood, and the princes lost their squads, since its members had the right to choose their service and left to serve more successful princes.

In such a situation, the Lithuanian tribal unions, which were at the stage of the collapse of the tribal organization, at the stage accompanied by military expansion, began to seize the western and southern lands of Ancient Rus'.

What was Lithuania?


The Lithuanian tribes (Aukshtaite) were at the tribal stage of development, staying in the XNUMXth-XNUMXth centuries. tributaries of neighboring Russian lands, while often raiding them. In the XIII century, the Lithuanians are disintegrating tribal relations. A tribal union is formed, which some researchers mistakenly consider a "state". This stage of development is characterized by aggressiveness, expansionist aspirations, campaigns for wealth in the name of prestige.

The formation of this tribal union was associated with the ongoing aggression on the part of the German orders against the pagan Lithuanians, and with campaigns by the Russian princes for tribute.

The Lithuanian "autocrat", and in fact the leader Mindovg (1195-1263), let us not be misled by magnificent titles, defeated his Lithuanian rivals, defeated the knights in the battle of Saul (Siauliai) in 1236 and in the battle of Lake Durbe in 1260. Taking advantage of the situation in Rus', the Lithuanians captured Black Russia (the lands along the upper reaches of the Neman and the cities of Grodno, Novgorodok, Slonim, Volkovysk), making the Russian Novogrudok their capital. The seizure of Russian lands by Lithuania began.

Already at the end of the XNUMXth century, the once powerful Russian Principality of Polotsk, now divided into Vitebsk and Polotsk, fell under the control of Lithuania for the first time.

The further process of the formation of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania (GDL), which is often called Russian-Lithuanian in the literature, will be associated with the permanent inclusion of Russian lands in its composition.

Lithuania goes to Rus'


If the northwestern volosts of Russia coped with the German threat with the help of princely squads and their militias, whose forces were not undermined by the Tatar-Mongol invasion, then the defeated volosts of the south and west did not have such forces, but in an alliance with each other, which was necessary for defense, they could not enter, because (and we return to this point again) they were "sovereign" city-states with historical grievances among themselves. A complex search began for ways to get rid of the Tatar-Mongol threat.

In such circumstances, the city-states, by tradition, began to go to the “row” (agreements) with Lithuania. For example, Polotsk with the Samogitian prince Troynat (Trenyat), the murderer of Mindovg, with Volhynia and Smolensk. The Lithuanian princes, when necessary, pursued a flexible policy, adhering to the principle: “We don’t destroy the old, but we don’t introduce new ones.”

They "dressed up" (agreed) with a more developed society, so they did not seek to interfere in the sovereign rights of Russian cities at the initial stage.


Kamenetskaya tower. XNUMXth century Kamenets. Brest region Reconstruction. Museum of Miniatures. Minsk. Photo of the author.

When we talk about the weakening of the military potential of the city, it should be understood that individual volosts could not resist the global threat of raids, but the cities still had their own militias.

The militia of Vitebsk and Polotsk, Smolensk, city-states, which the Tatars did not reach, constantly act in alliance with the Grand Dukes, including against Moscow. The Polotsk militia fought on the Kulikovo field in 1380, and the regiments of Smolensk, Vitebsk and Mstislavl participated in the battle on the Green Field (Grunwald) in 1410.

But soon the situation changes.

Already Prince Gediminas (1275-1341), seeing the weakness of Russian cities and princes, began campaigns to conquer them. In 1315, Gediminas captured Berestye and Dorohochyn. In 1324, Gediminas set out on a campaign against Kyiv, where a certain prince Simeon ruled, defeating the Russian princes on the way to him. Here, the grandchildren of Lev Daniilovich, Leo II and Andrei Yuryevich, who had not coped with the Lithuanian force back in Galich, also died.

It is significant that the war for the Galich and Volyn principalities went on with varying success between Poland, Lithuania and Hungary. The once powerful Russian lands, whose princes acted on equal terms with all neighboring countries, have now become a battlefield for them.
In the middle of the XIV century they lost their independence: the west of the Volyn volost and Galich were occupied by Poland. The territory of Poland doubled, in 1375 the second Catholic archbishopric in Poland was already created here, and the capital of the land was transferred to Lviv, the Polish king became the king of Poland and Rus'.

Transcarpathian Rus was captured by Hungary, Northern Bukovina went to the Moldavian principality, and Volhynia became part of Lithuania. Lithuania captured all the Chernigov principalities bordering the steppe and Bryansk. The struggle with Moscow for the Smolensk volost begins.

As part of Lithuania


The western and southern lands of Rus' fall under the rule of the Grand Duke of Lithuania. The Russian language was the state language here, the customary law of Russian volosts was used, and the chronicle was kept in Russian. But the assumption that in the period under review there was an alternative for the ancient Russian lands with two centers of collecting lands, Moscow and Lithuania, is an extreme modernization. The Grand Duke of Lithuania built the Lithuanian "previously state" on the basis of the Russian lands, using and exploiting the territories that fell under his rule.

In the Middle Ages there were not and could not be multi-ethnic states with equality of ethnic groups. Any presence of several ethnic groups in one potestar association was determined by a strict hierarchy, where there were subordinate and dominant ethnic groups.
The same applies to Ancient Rus' and Russia. Multinationality is the reality of today, which they are trying to attribute to the situation of the period of subjugation of Slavic tribes by Russia, which, of course, was not.

The Slavic colonization of Eastern Europe was accompanied by either the expulsion or destruction of the Finno-Ugric tribes, for example, in the northeast and northwest of Rus'. The tributes that we hear about in Ancient Rus' are not a tax on the population of the Russian land itself, free tributes were not paid if they were not taxed during the numerous clashes of the lands. So, Novgorod and Pskov took tribute from the Finnish tribes, Polotsk and Smolensk - from the Baltic, Suzdal and Rostov - from the Finno-Ugric peoples. Galich, Vladimir and Volyn - from the Balts.

It was because of the tribute from foreign ethnic groups that Russian cities fought. The same smerds are not serfs, not feudal dependent peasants, but foreign tributaries: Balts and Finno-Ugric peoples who found themselves in long-colonized territories. The same applies to Lithuania, which was not a "confederation" of Russians and Lithuanians, but an early state of the Lithuanian ethnos.

Later, Ambassador Herberstein rightly notes that the Russian people are under the control of three states: Poland, Lithuania and Moscow. But only one of them was Russian.


Map of Lithuania. XNUMXth century

The foundation of the early Lithuanian state was the Russian lands, which were based on a territorial community. Therefore, the power of the Lithuanian princes, which has a single center, seems to be more stable at the initial stage, in contrast to the power of the Russian princes in the northeast.

With the outward similarity of the goals and actions of the Moscow and Lithuanian grand dukes, there was an important difference: Lithuania, which again united the Russian principalities of the south and west of Ancient Rus', lagged behind the occupied Russian lands in socio-economic terms, which did not contribute to progress in their state building in the long run.

Where is the Horde?


The Tatar-Mongol invasion and the subsequent economic exploitation of Rus' by the steppe had a significant impact on economic and social relations in these territories. The nomads did not have mechanisms that could change the socio-economic path of development in Eastern Europe.

The process of unification of lands under the Grand Duke of Moscow and Lithuania led to the concentration of forces and made it possible to begin an effective struggle against the Horde. But it was only an outward appearance. For Western and Southern Rus', in fact, it was a change of one master to another. And it was with the Tatars, when using the Russian forces for the Russian lands, that Lithuania fought the Horde.

In 1362, Olgerd Gediminovich (1296–1377) defeated the Tatars at Blue Waters, subjugating Kiev, Podillya, Posemye and Pereyaslavl South, which, however, did not save these lands from paying the Horde exit. There was a victory in the battle, but not in the war with the steppe. In the 90s. The Horde again restores its power here south of the Blue Waters (a tributary of the Southern Bug). The offensive policy on the steppe was continued by Vitovt the Great, who sheltered Tokhtamysh and received a label on the lands to the Black Sea. Already in 1399, in the Battle of Worksla, Timur-Kutluk and Idegei (Edegei) defeated the Grand Duke Vitovt.

The Tatars devastated the Lithuanian possessions, took Kyiv, and Vitovt paid Timur-Kutluk 3 thousand rubles. What prompted Vitovt to go for a stronger rapprochement with Poland.


From Lithuania to Poland


Both Lithuania and Poland were threatened by the technologically and socially more advanced Teutonic Order. The crusaders terrorized the indigenous lands of Lithuania and sought to "punch a road" through the Lithuanian Samogitia to Livonia. And Poland during the XIII-XIV centuries. already suffered significant land losses associated with the capture of the Vistula Pomerania by the Teutonic Order.

Both countries, having a common threat, began to draw closer. Which would lead to their strengthening in confronting the German danger and would remove the issue of the paganism of Lithuania, which could accept Catholicism from Poland. The act of Krevo or the union of 1385 implied that the Grand Duke of Lithuania Jagiello would marry the 12-year-old Jadwiga, daughter of Louis of Anjou, receive the Polish throne, and Lithuania with all the lands of Rus' would be baptized and become a vassal of Poland. The latter categorically did not suit the Lithuanian nobility and was cancelled. Jagiello Olgerdovich became the Polish king, and Vitovt, the son of Keistut, became the Grand Duke of Lithuania.


Grand Duke of Lithuania Jagiello. Reconstruction. Authors P. Luk, Y. Peskun. Minsk Historical Museum. Belarus. Photo of the author.

The unification made it possible not only to successfully fight the Germans, the famous victory at Grunwald in 1410 confirmed this, but also to go on the offensive, so Lithuania received Samogitia. And it was beneficial for the Polish nobility to “move” to the east, capturing the former Old Russian lands that were part of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania by non-military means.

Thus, the colonization or polonization of the eastern lands became the most important and priority goal of the Polish ruling class and the nobility of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania, which entered into a “union” with them, actively adopting new experience. Of course, these were not actions caused by some kind of planning. The process was gradual, stemmed from the logic of historical development (where it is weak, it breaks there) and took several centuries.


Map of Poland and Lithuania. XNUMXth century

Poland, its early feudal system with the rights of feudal lords of all levels, was extremely attractive for the princes and service people of the GDL, and in their eyes stood much higher than the orders in the GDL, being a model of social relations, fashion and weapons.
The baptism of the Lithuanian pagan nobility into Catholicism consolidated the superiority of Poland in the union, although the Lithuanian and Russian nobility close to them resisted the subordinate place in the union.

In 1413, according to the Grodel's decree or act of law, the Polish gentry also received the Lithuanian nobility of the Catholic religion, and the Orthodox nobility received the same rights only 20 years later. This happened after a fierce struggle during the civil war in the Grand Duchy of Lithuania in 1432-1447. When one part of Lithuania stood for rapprochement with Poland, and the other part, mainly the Russian lands or the “great Russian principality”, led by Prince Boleslav-Svidrigailo Olgerdovich (d. 1452) - against the processes initiated by the union.

But this struggle on the part of the Lithuanian and Russian nobility of the “Great Russian Principality” was not successful due to the diverging goals and objectives of the participants, starting with their leader. Since this struggle was not for the equality of lands and cities of different ethnic groups that fell under the union, but for personal privileges. Each sought to receive personal "privileges", and having received them, he was ready to retreat from the common struggle. Svidrigailo was an extremely controversial figure, “...supported in this by the Russians,” wrote Jan Dlugosh, an author of the XNUMXth century, “who loved Skirgaila very much, as belonging to the same Greek rite.”

With the election of the Grand Duke of Lithuania Casimir IV, son of Jagiello (1422-1497) in 1447 as the Polish king, the union between Poland and Lithuania became personal, from 1569 - interstate.

With the development of new social relations, the division of labor, which resulted in the formation of "estates", in the conditions of introducing new orders from the outside (Magdeburg city law), the old Russian institutions either lost their significance or faded into the background. When in the lands that fell under the control of Lithuania, the process of disintegration of the old volost orders, due to the reasons that we have already written about, took several centuries, then on the lands occupied by Poland, this happened much faster. Poland was already an early class state, and its system was as perfect as it could be in the Middle Ages. The process of Polish feudalization of the rural population began in Galician Rus already at the end of the XNUMXth century. With the unions of the XNUMXth century, it also occurs in other Russian territories.

If after the Tatar-Mongol invasion all parts of Ancient Rus' developed in the same way - within the framework of the communal-territorial system in the XIV-XV centuries, then from the end of the XV century these paths diverge.

So for a long time the evolutionary path of state development was interrupted for the former Old Russian lands in the south and west of Eastern Europe.

Продолжение следует ...
152 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. +13
    30 March 2023 03: 59
    Thank you for laying everything out "on the shelves" in this story.
    1. +13
      30 March 2023 05: 42
      I confirm. The author expresses it interestingly. Originally and recognizably.
    2. +13
      30 March 2023 06: 34
      Quote from Andy_nsk
      Thank you for laying everything out "on the shelves" in this story.

      On the other hand, I got it mixed up!
      I still don’t understand, who is ON, Lithuanians or Belarusians (Litvins)? It seems like the Lithuanians were the main ones in the ON, and different Zhmaits, Lithuanians and other Baltic tribes were in a dependent position?
      1. +5
        30 March 2023 07: 29
        It seems like the Lithuanians were the main ones in the ON, and different Zhmaits, Lithuanians and other Baltic tribes were in a dependent position?

        Excuse me, please, where is this, so to speak, information from?
        From what historical sources or in what scientific works is it written about which Litvins?
        Black in Russian: the Lithuanian ethnos created the early Lithuanian state of the Principality of Lithuania, initially included the lands of Black Rus', which were even domain for Lithuania, and then all the lands of Rus' in the west and south, up to Moscow itself.
        The great Lithuanian princes and the Lithuanian nobility were at the head of this state. Dot.
        1. 0
          30 March 2023 15: 04
          Excuse me, do you have a specialized education and a degree in order to behave so categorically?
          I inform you that you have written absolute nonsense.
          ON was named in honor of the Lutichi tribe. Which founded the ON. And the name Lithuania came from the name of Lutva.
          Here is a link to the relevant material.
          I advise you to get acquainted with it first, and then make historical discoveries.
          How the Lyutichi created medieval Lithuania (Lutva):
          https://alternathistory.com/kak-lyutichi-srednevekovuyu-litvu-lyutvu-sozdali/
          1. -2
            30 March 2023 15: 08
            Excuse me, do you have a specialized education and a degree in order to behave so categorically?
            Has, Eduard Vashchenko - Candidate of Historical Sciences.
            1. +2
              30 March 2023 16: 07
              So is Candida? However.
              Literacy is not taught?
              1. -1
                30 March 2023 16: 18
                In this forum, clinging to typos is considered bad manners.
                1. -2
                  30 March 2023 18: 31
                  And he just has nothing else to cling to. laughing
                  1. +1
                    30 March 2023 18: 47
                    And he just has nothing else to cling to.
                    Shall we kill the "boar"?
                    1. Fat
                      +2
                      30 March 2023 19: 04
                      Support.
                      There is no place for such characters on this cultural "opening day". Could this be his job? Perform while disturbing others? ...
                      1. 0
                        30 March 2023 19: 18
                        Hello Borisych!
                        "Locomotives should be destroyed while they are teapots." (I don't remember who said)
                      2. +5
                        30 March 2023 20: 43
                        "Locomotives should be destroyed while they are teapots." (I don't remember who said)

                        this is from an old, bearded joke about a Chukchi who was hit by a steam locomotive
                    2. +1
                      30 March 2023 19: 52
                      He himself will die of indigestion and rupture of the gallbladder. laughing
            2. +3
              April 1 2023 09: 47
              Quote: 3x3zsave
              Eduard Vashchenko - Candidate of Historical Sciences.

              There are a dime a dozen such candidates. They even allow themselves to insult scientists respected by colleagues and recognized by people. Just yesterday, the historian Spitsyn E.Yu. spoke about this. Something I have not seen a single expert in either physics or mathematics? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mK24ElUd9YI
          2. +3
            30 March 2023 15: 23
            Quote: Sergey Horuzhyk
            https://alternathistory.com/kak-lyutichi-srednevekovuyu-litvu-lyutvu-sozdali/

            The name of the site speaks for itself. And you suggest reading this to an intelligent and adult person? laughing
            Quote: Sergey Horuzhyk
            I inform you that you have written absolute nonsense.

            laughing
            I inform you that you not only wrote absolute nonsense, but before that you also read it, believed it, and now you are replicating it. wassat
            1. +5
              30 March 2023 15: 54
              I have a profile systemic historical education. And I have the right to refer to those sources that I consider reliable.
              And I don't tend to argue with strangers. It's pointless.
              1. +1
                30 March 2023 16: 42
                Quote: Sergey Horuzhyk
                I have a specialized system of historical education.

                I don't believe this, sorry.
                I looked at the material you suggested. Diagonally, he deserves no more. If you think that such material can be taken seriously as a source of historical knowledge, then you received a “profile historical education” either as a patient in a psychiatric hospital or in a nursery group in a kindergarten.
                And more, I'm afraid, there's nothing more to say. request
                1. 0
                  30 March 2023 16: 51
                  We are not actually in the church to talk about faith. But the material is correct, although it is presented on such a site.
                  And you and others like you are just dense dunes who have never seen anything and have not read a single source.
                  And scooping their conjectures is unclear from what place.
                2. 0
                  30 March 2023 18: 16
                  there is nothing to talk about.

                  Michael,
                  So we talked, it’s difficult to explain correlation analysis to a preschooler.
                  Likewise, some commentators with truant secondary education, to explain what stupidity is, if it was not explained to them in kindergarten.
                  Man with
                  specialized systemic historical education
                  more like a first-year dropout from the first semester when he writes this:
                  And I have the right to refer to those sources that I consider reliable.

                  Links to a site in historical science are not links or scientific links: these are the basics.
                  First, historical sources are documents, chronicles, archaeological and numismatic sources, and not links to the site.
                  Secondly, historiography: this is a body of knowledge on a given topic, written by professional historians, i.e. topic, who can read in the language of the source (knows the language, studied it, etc.)
                  A professional historian refers either to a historical source or to the work of a professional historian, and not a site where, in the style of primitive philology, they write about lyutichs - Lithuanians: the similarity of letters is not a science of philology: Lithuanians are Lebanese or Libyans, everything is very similar. laughing
                  Everyone who is engaged in the GDL will give a link to professional historians, their names are known to everyone. And when writing the article, I certainly relied on these works.

                  Everything else is chatter and chatter: I read the article and am ready to argue and carry gag,
                  as a commentator expelled in the first semester with a specialized system education, who writes:
                  I have the right to refer to those sources that I consider reliable

                  Professionals do not have such a right, but truants have ... they skipped their "professional" knowledge.
                  1. +4
                    30 March 2023 18: 42
                    Sometimes it seems to me that under different nicknames Bar and Venya drop by in turns of bad memory. Today is just that case.
                    Dense ignorance, unbearable aplomb and inability to communicate.
                    Anton predicted the mass migration of these animals to the "History" section, and every time such something hatches in some article where our historical beau monde gathers, he shakes me by the sleeve and says: "I warned you!" smile
                    What can I say, he is partly right. It doesn’t look like mass migration yet, so, isolated cases, but you need to be ready.
                    Stand up as one
                    Let's say we won't!

                    Anthem of the union of virgins of Russia. smile
                    We will defend ourselves like the Pskovites against Batory. The enemy will not pass! laughing
                    1. +2
                      30 March 2023 18: 53
                      Anton predicted the mass migration of these animals to the "History" section
                      Well, I told you already!)))))))
                    2. +3
                      30 March 2023 19: 04
                      where our historical beau monde gathers, shakes my sleeve and says: "I warned you!"
                      Chesslovo, I wouldn’t want to shake it, but it happened. But active imbeciles on the forum cause me a "shoot to kill" reflex. And what is characteristic, with the subsequent "control".
                      1. +4
                        30 March 2023 20: 42
                        And what is characteristic, with the subsequent "control".

                        Come in, always happy to help, veterans out of turn. soldier
                    3. +4
                      30 March 2023 20: 42
                      Quote: Trilobite Master
                      Dense ignorance, unbearable aplomb and inability to communicate.

                      I see we are especially lucky today... laughing
                  2. +5
                    30 March 2023 20: 36
                    Quote: Eduard Vaschenko
                    lyutichs - Lithuanians

                    It seems to me that a mistake has crept in here: it is correct to read "buttercups-Lithuanians" laughing
                    1. +8
                      30 March 2023 20: 48
                      Quote: Mihaylov
                      "buttercups-Lithuanians"

                      And Roman daisies.
                      1. +5
                        30 March 2023 21: 12
                        Quote: Trilobite Master
                        And Roman daisies.

                        I think they are Lupines: Roman Lupines (they ate lupins) drinks
          3. +6
            30 March 2023 16: 21
            Forgive me generously. The link you provided, translated into Russian, begins with "alternative history. com"))
            1. 0
              30 March 2023 16: 30
              Remember the classic anecdote. Do you want checkers or go?
              1. +3
                30 March 2023 19: 08
                You definitely go from this forum, somewhere far away.
            2. 0
              30 March 2023 16: 32
              There are many other links. Here, for example.
              https://czeslaw-list.livejournal.com/131281.html
              You study the facts, not signs.
          4. 0
            31 March 2023 16: 54
            Quote: Sergey Horuzhyk
            How the Lyutichi created medieval Lithuania (Lutva):

            The name of the site seems to hint. On the legends and myths of Belarusian chauvinists.
        2. -4
          31 March 2023 09: 17
          The question of the GDL is not historical and not even scientific. It is political. Because it raises the topic of the objective independence of present-day Belarus. And therefore there is a firm ideological order to undermine this historical platform of independence in every possible way. Even with the help of obvious false stuff.
          It is no coincidence that in the days of the USSR, the Great Soviet Encyclopedia very sparingly and through gritted teeth revealed the topic of the ON.
          The Polish Wikipedia notes that the policy of attributing the creation of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania to the Samogitians-Aukstaits began immediately after 1861. And especially after the uprising of 1863. They were officially declared Litvins. And the real Litvins were made by some obscure Belarusians, organizing their rebranding. the official term is Belarus. This is the time of Catherine II. For it was necessary to eliminate the memory of the existence of ON.
          This article continues the falsification tradition. In every possible way distorting those facts that have long been officially known. So, shame on you. You are a falsifier.
          Because, according to Lenin, the truth should not depend on who it serves.
      2. -5
        30 March 2023 15: 05
        https://alternathistory.com/kak-lyutichi-srednevekovuyu-litvu-lyutvu-sozdali/
        1. Fat
          +8
          30 March 2023 15: 26
          hi Sergey. alternathistory.com is an alternate history site in both name and content. This is often just fantasy and speculation with hypotheses, but by no means a source of historical knowledge.
          1. -2
            30 March 2023 15: 56
            Here is another source for you.https://czeslaw-list.livejournal.com/131281.html
            1. Fat
              +4
              30 March 2023 16: 41
              This is LiveJournal, not a source. The source of this fantasy is http://samlib.ru/e/rogatina/lutizi.shtml ( © Copyright Ezapat Serge Aleksandrovich ([email protected]) from samizdat )
              1. -4
                30 March 2023 16: 52
                And what is here, a source of knowledge to talk about objectivity?
                You claim to be an objective reality, but instead I see not a statement of facts, but only your versions and opinions.
          2. 0
            30 March 2023 16: 05
            The point is not in the name, but in the content. That is, the facts.
            And the facts are as follows:
            1. Modern Lithuanians created a written language only in the 16th century. Remember those states that were created by non-literate peoples.
            2. The capital of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania was in the city of Novogrudok.
            Taking into account that the capital of the Lyutichs was previously the city of Stargorod, aka Oldenburg, certain conclusions can be drawn.
            3. The Statute of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania was written in the then Russian language and therefore it is clear why the indicated figures of the princes were placed on the monument to the millennium of Russia .. These were the same peoples who had previously taken part in the first wave of emigration and the founding of Veliky Novgorod.
            4. “Mindovg is the son of Ringolt (ruled from 1200) and the grandson of Algimunt, the princes of Novgorod and the surrounding lands. This is stated in the "Chronicle of Bykhovets" (dated from the beginning of the 1582th century) and in the "Chronicle of Polish, Lithuanian, Zhemoyt and All Rus'" by Maciej Stryjkovsky (XNUMX).
            The “Great Polish Chronicle” was translated from Latin in 1987 by a group of Moscow State University scientists under the editorship of Corresponding Member of the USSR Academy of Sciences V.L. Yanina. So let's start with the fact that in the comments to the translation by V.L. Yanin emphasizes more than once that Mendolph is Mindovg.
            Treaties have been preserved under which, in July 1253 and August 7, 1259, Mindovg transferred the eastern part of the territory of Prussia to the Teutonic Order (Preussisches Urkundenbuch. Politische Abtheilung. Koenigsberg, 1909. Bd. 1, Hlft. 2 // ed. A. Seraphim. P. 33-35). These are, among others, the lands of Sudovia (Yatvyagia) and Skalovia.

            The easternmost part of Prussia is Skalovia (located behind Koenigsberg on the Neman River, now in the Kaliningrad region of the Russian Federation). The crusaders took it over last. Since it belonged to Mindovg, he certainly was the king of Prussia.

            By the way, according to the German chronicle, some “rutens” from Pomorye (possibly Lutichi) around 1221 massively migrated precisely to Skalovia, where they tried to seize part of the land, but abandoned this idea and came along the Neman to the Novogrudok region, where they stopped.
            And so on and so on and so on.
            Learn, dunno. And do not teach professionals, as you do all the time.
  2. -3
    30 March 2023 04: 20
    In the Middle Ages there were not and could not be multi-ethnic states with equality of ethnic groups.

    But what about Byzantium? You can also call Spain from the time of Ferdinand and Isabella ...
    1. +12
      30 March 2023 05: 41
      Nda? Interestingly, but among these incestuous people, what ethnic groups had equal rights - the Spaniards with the Moors and the Jews?
      1. 0
        30 March 2023 06: 38
        Quote: not the one
        which ethnic groups had equal rights

        In fact, there are no Spaniards now. This concept is rather political. Extremadurans, Galicians, Basques, Catalans, etc. And each descended from Goths, Suebi, Alans, probably also Vandals ...
        1. +13
          30 March 2023 07: 18
          Be consistent then - there are no Moors either. As a people. You still did not deign to answer my question - what equal rights did Jews and Catalans have? Arabs and Extremadurans?
        2. +13
          30 March 2023 16: 21
          At 7 hi from Argentina.
          I recently returned from Spain.....I experienced something like a culture shock, in different places in Spain they don't speak Spanish, signs in their own language, ads in their own language, price tags in stores....etc.
          My Latin friends, including myself in Tolosa, the country of the Basques, Euescos, did not understand a single word. It's the same in Barcelona. Only in Madrid Spanish is heard everywhere. The Basque country flies its flag, Catalonia its... and everyone wants independence. There are many Ukrainian women with children on the street, very well dressed.
          And on TV, in supermarkets... they collect money for weapons for Ukrainians....
          I think that this is Russia's revenge for supporting the Republicans in the 30s of the last century.
          1. +8
            30 March 2023 20: 20
            There are many Ukrainian women with children on the street, very well dressed.
            There are also a lot of them in Genoa and Nice, as well as Ukrainians of quite combat-ready age. Only there they are not very well dressed - in abibas from the bazaar. On topic, Lithuanians are incredibly proud of their imperial history, as if these events took place just 10 years ago. For some reason, I did not understand and did not receive an intelligible answer.
            1. +3
              30 March 2023 20: 42
              Quote: Bolt Cutter
              Lithuanians are incredibly proud of their imperial history, as if these events took place just 10 years ago. Why - I did not understand and did not receive an intelligible answer

              brakes because Yes
              1. +2
                30 March 2023 21: 21
                Hi! smile
                Long time no see. What's up?
                There, look, what a srach began, I don’t even remember this. laughing
    2. Fat
      +6
      30 March 2023 06: 11
      hi
      Quote: Luminman
      But what about Byzantium? You can also call Spain from the time of Ferdinand and Isabella ...

      I do not think that medieval Byzantium and, especially, Spain of the times of Isabella and Ferdinand, are successful examples of multi-ethnic formations with equality of ethnic groups. The unifying feature in both states was Christianity, where "there is neither Greek nor Jew." This is a very shaky ethnic equality and ended. request
      1. 0
        30 March 2023 06: 42
        Quote: Thick
        I don’t think that medieval Byzantium and, especially, Spain from the time of Isabella and Ferdinand are good examples.

        In my opinion, Byzantium is the most successful example. Quite a multinational empire, where all ethnic groups are equal. Except, of course, Muslims and Jews... Yes, and in Spain the same thing...
        1. +12
          30 March 2023 07: 14
          Quite a multinational empire, where all ethnic groups are equal. Except, of course, Muslims and Jews...
          Again, you contradict yourself. I’m not going to make a scapegoat out of you, but if you are guilty, you will answer according to the law, but if not, then go, as they say, in peace. But I want to figure it out. Do you understand? I want to figure it out. equality, peace, friendship, chewing gum?
        2. +3
          30 March 2023 07: 21
          In my opinion, Byzantium is the most successful example. Quite a multinational empire, where all ethnic groups are equal. Except, of course, Muslims and Jews... Yes, and in Spain the same thing...

          After the Arab conquests, Byzantium turns, in fact, into a mono-ethnic state of the Greeks, this is an axiom.
          Yes, in Byzantium, in theory, the ethnic principle was secondary: they called themselves Romans, not Greeks, for example. A Romani is a Christian, and vice versa. Therefore, there were so many Armenians in Byzantium, including emperors.
          But, as soon as Byzantium, in the tenth century. the beginning of the renaissance and the inclusion of other peoples, formulas immediately appeared, who were more subordinate, who were less. The Bulgarians, despite the fact that they became Christians, did not want to live in this universal empire, in submission to the Grecos.
          1. +1
            30 March 2023 09: 39
            Quote: Eduard Vaschenko
            After the Arab conquests, Byzantium turns, in fact, into a mono-ethnic state of the Greeks

            The heart of Byzantium - Constantinople - is a huge pump that sucked into itself from the farthest corners of its empire a variety of peoples - Slavs, Germans, Turks, Armenians, etc. The only thing that united them all was the language and Orthodoxy.

            But how they left Latin and completely switched to Greek is a mystery to me. It is clear that many Greeks lived there, but this is not the reason ...
    3. +2
      30 March 2023 06: 44
      You can also call Spain from the time of Ferdinand and Isabella ...
      Hello, colleague!
      Do not confuse confession and ethnic identity. In the second case, Spain has never been a mono-ethnic state. With regard to the first, it can be said that the "Catholic Kings" created an autocephalous church, independent of the papal curia.
      1. 0
        30 March 2023 06: 51
        Quote: 3x3zsave
        Do not confuse confession and ethnic identity. In the second case, Spain has never been a mono-ethnic state

        That is exactly what I want to say. Spain is not a mono-ethnic country even now ...
        Welcome!
      2. +2
        30 March 2023 07: 24
        You can also call Spain from the time of Ferdinand and Isabella ...
        Hello, colleague!

        Greetings Anton,
        I will add, Spain was formed on the paths of the reconquista, what kind of equality of ethnic groups is there?
        hi
        1. 0
          30 March 2023 07: 51
          Hello Edward!
          In my opinion, the main role in the formation of the ethnic self-awareness of the majority of modern nations was played by the colonial policy of modern times. In other words: you are a Basque, a Catalan or an Asturian in the metropolis, and in Guayaquil we are all Spaniards.
        2. +2
          30 March 2023 10: 27
          Quote: Eduard Vaschenko
          Spain was formed on the paths of the reconquista, what kind of equality of ethnic groups is there?

          Moriscos and Jews testify.
          Greetings Edward! hi
      3. Fat
        +3
        30 March 2023 07: 55
        hi Hello Anton.
        Quote: 3x3zsave
        it can be said that the "Catholic Kings" created an autocephalous church, independent of the papal curia.

        It can be said that "Catholic kings" created the prerequisites for autocephaly.
        Nevertheless, the Habsburgs "exacerbated" everything smile
    4. +7
      30 March 2023 10: 49
      Quote: Luminman
      In the Middle Ages there were not and could not be multi-ethnic states with equality of ethnic groups.

      But what about Byzantium?

      There is an even more illustrative example, and it is in the example of this article. This is the Moldavian principality.
      The author is slightly wrong about this phrase
      Quote: Edward
      Northern Bukovina went to the Moldavian principality,
      It was Bukovina that became the forming core of the Moldavian Principality. It has not "departed" anywhere; it has become a relatively independent unit. And yes, Bukovina was not then divided into north and south.
      In the Moldavian Principality, Rusyns, Vlachs, Poles, Hungarians, and Jews had equal rights. Faith no one burdened with the supremacy of Orthodoxy.
    5. 0
      30 March 2023 11: 59
      Quote: Luminman
      But what about Byzantium? You can also call Spain from the time of Ferdinand and Isabella ...

      But what about Rus'? Quite a multi-ethnic state, and from the moment the Vikings were called.
      But Spain is also suitable - it is very multi-ethnic, and since the time of the migration of peoples. But there was no Spain in the Middle Ages. There were Castile, Aragon, Andalusia and other completely sovereign territorial entities that were formed, just on a national basis. And they united just in time for the end of the Middle Ages. smile
      1. +3
        30 March 2023 12: 51
        Quote: Trilobite Master
        But there was no Spain in the Middle Ages.

        Well, how could it not? And the complete expulsion of the Arabs from the Pyrenees is not the creation of a united Spain? Galicians, Catalans, Valencians, Andalusians, etc. - this is the compost from which Spain grew. And only Jews and Muslims had no rights in this state. True, this is the end of the Middle Ages ...
        1. +5
          30 March 2023 13: 32
          The complete expulsion of the Arabs took place at the end of the XNUMXth century. - just in time for the new time. Before that, there were sovereign states. In the Middle Ages, Spain, as such, did not exist yet.
    6. +6
      30 March 2023 16: 33
      That's a great question.
      Should Byzantium be considered a medieval European state or be considered a relic of the Roman Empire?

      Something like "is a person of advanced years, born and raised in the USSR, a Russian in the modern sense of the word? Or is he a bearer of a different mentality from which he experiences constant dissonance?"))

      But in the time and place described by the author, a multi-ethnic state really could not exist. It is not needed. Like the Spartans with the helots.
  3. +9
    30 March 2023 05: 43
    Pseudo-historical article,
    The current state of Lithuania has the same relation to the Grand Duchy of Lithuania as Ivan the Terrible has to Odysseus or to the Roman emperors. Those Lithuanians are modern Belarusians. There is an opinion that originally the word lithuania meant a conscripted estate. Statutes, i.e., codes of laws of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania, were published by the way in the Old Belarusian language.
    1. +3
      30 March 2023 06: 44
      Quote from Tim666
      Lithuanians are modern Belarusians

      More correctly - Lithuanians. And Belarus, rather, is the successor of ON ...
      1. +2
        30 March 2023 07: 05
        Quote from Tim666
        Lithuanians are modern Belarusians
        More correctly - Lithuanians. And Belarus, rather, is the successor of ON ...


        The principality was called the Grand Duchy of Lithuania, the princes were Lithuanians, and ... Belarus is the heiress?
        Why not Ukraine? Yes, I heard such nonsense in Belarus on every corner. To the question:
        so you, we? (my ancestors from Belarus) were krepaks, but pans, gentry Lithuanians, yes Poles? You yourself tell on excursions: the gentry get drunk and, having nothing to do, go through the village to flog the peasants?

        They lower their eyes modestly and keep quiet.
        The text of the article is about Svidrigailo, were these Russian territories again fighting for the Lithuanian inheritance?
        The Slavs in this principality were a subordinate element, and from the end of the XNUMXth century. and at all become krepaks among the Poles, Lithuanians and all sorts of Ostrozhskys and Vishnevetskys who became Polonized.
        And how do they treat their inheritance showed Bohdan Khmelnitsky during the liberation war, did they fight there with their inheritance like that?
        Yes, and in 1939, even before the arrival of the Soviet Army, Belarusians with pitchforks ran after "their heritage"?
        1. +3
          30 March 2023 07: 20
          Quote: Eduard Vaschenko
          The principality was called the Grand Duchy of Lithuania, the princes were Lithuanians, and ... Belarus is the heiress?

          Lithuanians with Samogitians sat there in the farms and did not stick out anywhere. The main ethnic element of the ON was the Slavs...
          1. +2
            30 March 2023 07: 44
            Lithuanians with Samogitians sat there in the farms and did not stick out anywhere.

            Which farms? What scientific papers say this?
            The main ethnic element of the ON was the Slavs...

            Undoubtedly, the main but subordinate element, over time, as I wrote in this article, this led to a completely difficult situation: the endless uprisings of the XNUMXth and XNUMXth centuries. testify to this, and everything ends with an uprising led by Bogdan Khmelnitsky, such a "synergy" of ethnic groups.
            If some are for the farms, others are the main ones, why oppose the farms?
            1. +1
              30 March 2023 07: 56
              Quote: Eduard Vaschenko
              If some are for the farms, others are the main ones, why oppose the farms?

              Depending on what time to talk about. The confrontation began after the adoption of Christianity. Catholic-Orthodox...
            2. 0
              31 March 2023 11: 22
              Quote: Eduard Vaschenko
              Undoubtedly, the main, but subordinate element,

              Edward, I'm sorry, but you think in clichés.
              Slavic (Russian) boyars, as they were, remained at the helm of local government. The ruling dynasty of the Ruriks crumbled. The Lithuanian Gedeminoviches came.
              Tell me why the wives of the Lithuanians were from "subordinate" Russian families? Why didn't the Russian boyar families choke - the Ostrog families, for example?
        2. +2
          30 March 2023 10: 35
          Quote: Eduard Vaschenko
          The principality was called the Grand Duchy of Lithuania, the princes were Lithuanians, and ... Belarus is the heiress?

          And how else to justify the "historical Belarusian statehood"?
          Problem though! laughing
          1. +3
            30 March 2023 11: 26
            The principality was called the Grand Duchy of Lithuania, the princes were Lithuanians, and ... Belarus is the heiress?
            And how else to justify the "historical Belarusian statehood"?

            Sergey welcome
            totally agree.
            Yes way. laughing good
          2. +4
            30 March 2023 12: 26
            Quote: Mihaylov
            And how else to justify the "historical Belarusian statehood"?

            Polotsk, only Polotsk.
            And count the independence of Belarus from the beginning of the reign of Bryachislav Izyaslavich. In my opinion, it is quite real and historical.
            1. 0
              30 March 2023 16: 12
              That is why you are not a historian. That you have an opinion. An opinion is not a historical fact.
        3. +1
          30 March 2023 16: 11
          Kovo? What was the name of ON do not know?
          Then I inform you. The Grand Duchy of Lithuania, Russian and Samogitian.
          Where Lithuania denoted the territory of present-day Belarus, or rather western Belarus with a center in Novogrudok, Russian-proper Ukraine, and Samogitia-modern Lithuania.
          And the title of the Russian emperors, the territory of the present Republic of Lithuania was called Samogitia.
          You would first get a systematic education, and then just start writing books.
    2. Fat
      +6
      30 March 2023 06: 55
      hi
      Quote from Tim666
      Pseudo-historical article,
      The current state of Lithuania has the same relation to the Grand Duchy of Lithuania as Ivan the Terrible has to Odysseus or to the Roman emperors. Those Lithuanians are modern Belarusians. There is an opinion that originally the word lithuania meant a conscripted estate. Statutes, i.e., codes of laws of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania, were published by the way in the Old Belarusian language.

      You can look at the title of the Bible of Francysk Skaryna


      As the main language of communication between the inhabitants of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania, Russian was widely used, which was understandable to the Slavic majority of the state. It was the Russian language in its Western version - the grandfather of the current Ukrainian and Belarusian.
      The speech of the Slavic inhabitants of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania is now called Old Belarusian or Western Russian by linguists. In Ukraine, it is called Old Ukrainian. And the native speakers of this language no wonder called their speech - "prosta mova" / "Russian mova".
      In modern Poland, by the way, the main language of the GDL is known as Język ruski (Russian). While the Poles also speak Język rosyjski (that is, the language of modern Russia).
      As for modern Lithuania, you are right, it is not territorially connected with the GDL, while the cultural connection with Russia is partial.
    3. 0
      30 March 2023 06: 55
      Pseudo-historical article,
      The current state of Lithuania is related to the Grand Duchy of Lithuania

      When you write a gag, if you please, argue.
      What does Odysseus have to do with Ivan the Terrible, what is the news of science that modern Lithuanians are not the ancestors of those Lithuanians about whom the article is written?
      What do the Slavs, the ancestors of the Belarusians, have to do with the Lithuanians, the Balts?
      The article says that all legislation was written in Russian.
      Statutes, i.e., codes of laws of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania, were published by the way in the Old Belarusian language.

      What are the statutes? Specifically written in the old Belarusian you are talking about? When did the first common statute for the entire ON appear? When did the old Belarusian language begin to form? Was it during the period described in the article?

      Don't write about things you don't understand...
      1. ANB
        +6
        30 March 2023 11: 05
        . that modern Lithuanians are not the ancestors of those Lithuanians about whom the article is written?

        If quite literally, then modern Lithuanians cannot in any way be the ancestors of any of the nations of those who lived in the time described in the article. Typo?
        1. +1
          30 March 2023 12: 11
          If quite literally, then modern Lithuanians cannot in any way be the ancestors of any of the nations of those who lived in the time described in the article. Typo?

          Why are there so many people who skipped the whole school ...
          Although they learned to write, although ...
        2. +2
          30 March 2023 12: 29
          Quote: ANB
          modern Lithuanians cannot be ancestors in any way

          Don't pick on the little things. It is clear that you need to read "descendants". smile
      2. -1
        30 March 2023 16: 13
        Both-on! Get it!
        1. 0
          30 March 2023 21: 36
          , as Moltke the younger used to say: ma-hungry if you want to talk to me.!


          Announce the source of information, please. Where, when, under what circumstances?

    4. +7
      30 March 2023 08: 05
      Quote from Tim666
      Statutes, i.e., codes of laws of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania, were published by the way in the Old Belarusian language.

      In the 14th century there was neither Old Belous, nor Ukrainian, nor South Russian, nor in our concept of Russian, all the tribes of the Russians of the Russians spoke the same language, the Slavic language, which was the basis, but in each tribe it had a difference, like the Radimichi, Krivichi , Dregovichi - They occupied not only the north of Belarus, but also the neighboring regions of the Dvina and Dnieper regions (Pskov and Smolensk regions), but already the meadow and the Drevlyans (they are the distant ancestors of modern Ukrainians) already had a difference.
      But just like the languages ​​of the Russians, the languages ​​of the Poles, southern Slavs, Kashubians, Prussians and others had a common basis.
    5. +3
      30 March 2023 12: 20
      Quote from Tim666
      The current state of Lithuania has the same relation to the Grand Duchy of Lithuania as Ivan the Terrible has to Odysseus or to the Roman emperors.

      Lithuania is a tribe of Baltic origin from which the ruling elite of the ON came out. Which, by the way, quite possibly, was in fact Slavic already at the beginning of its rise.
      This tribe lived on the territory of modern Lithuania, partially, Belarus. Modern Belarus is the heir, rather, of the Principality of Polotsk, and the Principality of Polotsk is mainly Krivichi. So the Belarusians, for the most part, are the descendants of the Krivichi.
      ON - of course, the Slavic state.
      1. +4
        30 March 2023 12: 58
        Quote: Trilobite Master
        ON - definitely a Slavic state

        This should be framed and hung on the wall...
      2. -4
        30 March 2023 16: 20
        G-gga! Another discovery of a dunno. I advise you to fix it and apply for the Ig Nobel Prize.
        1. +2
          30 March 2023 16: 46
          You know, for your manner of communicating and for those stupid things that you managed to weave here, I’ll give you a minus for each comment. And with that, I will end with you for today.
          1. -2
            30 March 2023 17: 35
            Yes, you are simply infallible. Just like the Pope.
  4. -1
    30 March 2023 07: 11
    The author considers the creation of state formations on the territory of the former USSR in the period from the XNUMXth to the XNUMXth centuries against the backdrop of constant threats from the Tatars and Germans, although the Tatars appeared in Eastern and Western parts of Europe only once in the middle of the XNUMXth century, and it seems that they are constantly present there.
    And only as a confrontation with them, and not a natural evolutionary process of unification of the unification of city-states into state formations, contributes to the creation of states, in this case, ON and its further union with Poland.
    Naturally, the principalities that resisted the Tatars (GVK) were the most disgraced. And the lands left without "attendance" naturally became part of Lithuania, Poland, Hungary.
    Rogerius, mentioned in the article, called his treatise:
    "Sorrowful song about the ruin of the Kingdom of Hungary by the Tatars"
    Europeans also do not see the Mongols in this invasion.
    1. +1
      30 March 2023 07: 53
      And only as a confrontation with them, and not a natural evolutionary process of unification of the unification of city-states into state formations, contributes to the creation of states, in this case, ON and its further union with Poland.

      Alexander, good afternoon.
      So the problem is that such an unification of city-states into a single state entity did not happen, I will leave it out of the picture, as far as it was generally real.
      hi
  5. +4
    30 March 2023 08: 06
    Thanks Edward!

    Probably, the lines about the fact that at first there was a principality were sunk most of all. And then the territory for which the neighbors are fighting.

    And this is the whole history of mankind.
  6. -1
    30 March 2023 08: 10
    This happened after a fierce struggle during the civil war in the Grand Duchy of Lithuania in 1432-1447.
    It is worth adding here that at different periods of this war, Svidrigailo received help from the Teutonic and Livonian crusaders, the prince of Tver, and from time to time he was supported by the Tatars and the Moldavian ruler. Indeed, this war was not connected with common interests, but more with personal ones.
  7. +10
    30 March 2023 08: 13
    there are some inaccuracies and inconsistencies in the article.
    Firstly, the Grand Duchy of Lithuania has nothing in common with present-day Lithuania. ON was one of the many old Russian principalities, fragmented and not united into one Russian state of the Old Slavic lands, and in fact all the main historical artifacts and historical objects of this ON are now located on the territory of present-day Belarus. And in Lithuania, realizing that now Lithuania is falsifying history, they thank God that Lukashenko was the chairman of the collective farm and not a doctor of historical sciences ...
    Although Belarusian historians have long reminded that the real heirs of the GDL are Belarus, Russia and partially Poland, and that Vilna, according to this inheritance, is a Belarusian city.
    As for the figures of the Gediminovich dynasty - Gedimin, Vitovt, Olgerd on the monument in Veliky Novgorod, these princes, as the princes of the old Russian principality of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania, built and created the Russian state in the same way and on an equal footing, like the princes of Vladimir, Ryazan, Suzdal, Kiev, Moscow principalities. And that the princes of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania fought with the Moscow princes - this is an inter-princely-clan struggle for inheritance, for traditions, for a bride, for a son-in-law - but not for land, a throne, or not for the transformation of these Orthodox principalities into Catholicism. Everything changed with the advent of the Jagiellonian dynasty, the GDL fell under Poland, and common programs began with Poland, how to put the Poles on the Russian throne and how to split the already assembled Russia. That is why there is not a single figure or bas-relief of representatives of the Jagiellonian dynasty on the monument in Veliky Novgorod.
    A very interesting person in the article by the mentioned Polish historian Jan Dlugosh, in the context of how history is being "invented" in Lithuania now and in the context of the article by the mentioned Casimir the Fourth. Lithuanians in all sources emphasize that the son of Casimir the Fourth, Prince Casimir, who is the patron saint of Lithuania, pious and honest, so sincere and faithful brought up the light and standard of justice and truth of that time - the Polish historian Jan Dlugosh. But as soon as you point out to today's Lithuanians the works of the historian Jan Dlugosh, who is actually a contemporary of the Battle of Grundwald, where Dlugosh presents facts about how the Lithuanian regiments led by Vitovt shamefully fled from the battlefield in the Battle of Grundwald, then Dlugosh for Lithuanians is already immediately a liar, a traitor without conscience and honor , and the one who asks a Lithuanian such questions is Putin's dog ...
    1. +4
      30 March 2023 09: 44
      Quote: north 2
      Firstly, the Grand Duchy of Lithuania has nothing in common with present-day Lithuania.

      Here it is in the top ten!
    2. +1
      30 March 2023 11: 45
      there are some inaccuracies and inconsistencies in the article.
      Firstly, the Grand Duchy of Lithuania has nothing in common with present-day Lithuania. ON was one of the many old Russian principalities, fragmented and not united into one Russian state of the Old Slavic lands, and in fact all the main historical artifacts and historical objects of this ON are now located on the territory of present-day Belarus. And in Lithuania, realizing that now Lithuania is falsifying history, they thank God that Lukashenko was the chairman of the collective farm and not a doctor of historical sciences ...

      Good afternoon,
      there are no inaccuracies in the article.
      Let's, as our president said, separate the flies from the cutlets.
      Firstly, only nationalists, bourgeois nationalists, are engaged in the justification of historical roots in order to prove to other nationalists that they are ogogo and egege.
      And nothing else.
      Yes, historians can also “tweak” history, they can have one view or another, depending on political preferences.
      But back to ON. There are several views on what it was. Key, it was a “confederation”, a union of Lithuania and Russian lands: we do not destroy the old, we do not introduce new ones.
      Or the Russian-Lithuanian state (a rudimentary or early state. For most of my life, I also clearly adhered to this view and direction in history.
      What's wrong here? Not so, and I wrote in an article about the alternative, it turns out that there was an alternative, the Russians could all have fun living as part of the ON, for example, having captured Moscow during the “Lithuanian land” of the 60s. XNUMXth century?
      If there were no further development in history, we would agree: yes, it was a kind of confederation of Russians and Lithuanians.
      But ... history has put the GDL before a choice of how to develop further, within the GDL and assimilate each other to everyone, would the Russians have done it more likely, or is there another way?
      And it was the Lithuanian nobility with the king who chose the path of union with a more developed state in the West, if you describe events very straightforwardly, with Poland. And the Russian lands, as subordinate to Lithuania, took this path, having fought a little with Svidrigailo, but still obeying their LORD, THE GRAND DUKE OF LITHUANIA. So that's what happened.
      And finally, of course, the modern Lithuanian people - the direct descendants of that Lithuania, the Belarusians, the descendants of those Russian city-states of Black Rus', Minsk and Polotsk, who submitted to Lithuania, lived in the ON, but not Lithuanians. hi
      1. 0
        30 March 2023 12: 40
        Quote: Eduard Vaschenko
        the justification of historical roots is exclusively occupied by nationalists, bourgeois nationalists, in order to prove to other nationalists that they are ogogo and egege.
        And nothing else.

        Gold words. I subscribe. smile
        Quote: Eduard Vaschenko
        it was the Lithuanian nobility with the king who chose the path of union with a more developed state in the West, if you describe events very straightforwardly, with Poland.

        Absolutely right. I wrote about this in the first comment below.
        Quote: Eduard Vaschenko
        the modern Lithuanian people are the direct descendants of that Lithuania,

        And I fully support this thesis.
        Quote: Eduard Vaschenko
        Belarusians are the descendants of those Russian city-states of Black Rus', Minsk and Polotsk, who submitted to Lithuania, lived in the ON, but not Lithuanians.

        By and large - the descendants of the Krivichi. If my memory serves me right, the Krivichi are Western Slavs, like the Novgorod Slovenes. Closer in kind to the Poles and Czechs than to the Polans and Drevlyans.
      2. -3
        30 March 2023 16: 38
        Yes, you are just some kind of Pope. An absolutely infallible source of absolute truth. You need to erect a monument to yourself in your small homeland. Because they have already been bronzed.
  8. +4
    30 March 2023 11: 27
    Thank you! I liked the article very much, I learned a lot of interesting things for myself.
  9. 0
    30 March 2023 11: 33
    It's funny how here people are twisted by one word "Lithuanian" in the name of the state "The Grand Duchy of Lithuania, Russian and Zhemoytskoye."
    Even more amusing are the annoying attempts to get into the historical section of people who have no idea about history.
    1. +5
      30 March 2023 12: 15
      Denis welcome,
      It's funny how people here are twisted by one word "Lithuanian"

      I could not even imagine such a thing.
      1. +1
        30 March 2023 12: 18
        Good afternoon,
        There is a new regiment in the army of histori-freaks. A sect of witnesses "there was no Lithuania and Lithuanians in the GDL" was added to the Novokhronolozhtsy and Gumilevites
        1. +1
          30 March 2023 12: 58
          Quote: Engineer
          sect of witnesses "there was no Lithuania and Lithuanians in the ON"

          Yes, they were, they were ... The only question is how many of them were there? What is the ratio of the descendants of the Slavs and the Balts in the Grand Duchy of Lithuania, the times of, say, Vytautas? Especially after the same Vytautas gave Samogitia to the Germans...
          1. +3
            30 March 2023 14: 56
            And what immediately with Vitovt? Don't want to go with Mindauga? Much closer to the roots
            1. +3
              30 March 2023 15: 31
              From Mindovga? It is possible with him, it is also interesting. smile
              Your rates? smile
              1. +2
                30 March 2023 15: 43
                No bids required.
                There is an obvious fact ON - a multinational (or rather multi-ethnic) education. At the same time, the numerical ratio of the elements gradually shifted in favor of the Slavic. But the "original", Baltic tradition was still strong under the same Keistut. These are the commonplaces of historiography.
                1. +1
                  30 March 2023 16: 48
                  Keistut ruled over Lithuania proper and Zhmudya. But under the modern Keistutu Olgerda, the Baltic tradition was not at all so pronounced.
                  1. -1
                    30 March 2023 17: 15
                    The Baltic tradition is clearly expressed in the original Baltic lands.
                    Olgerd was in the "Russian" section. No controversy
                    1. +1
                      30 March 2023 17: 44
                      Khrustalev found the following link:
                      Arbuzov, 1912. S. 2. Yu. Kakk and E. Tarvel determine the number of Baltic tribes at the beginning of the 170th century. as follows: Lithuania - about 190-140 thousand people; Latgalians, Curonians, Semigallians, villages - about 160-15 thousand people; Livs - about 28-110 thousand people; Estonians - 120-1997 thousand people. (Kahk and Tarvel, 12, pp. 13-XNUMX).

                      It is unlikely that by the time of Mindaugas these figures, if they correspond to reality, have changed much.
                      Data on the population of the Principality of Polotsk, which was already under the rule of Mindovg, at least partially, offhand could not be found, but it was unlikely to be inferior, rather superior, perhaps at times. So it turns out interesting with Mindovg too.
                      1. +3
                        30 March 2023 18: 52
                        Data on the population of the Principality of Polotsk, which was already under the rule of Mindovg, at least partially, offhand could not be found, but it was unlikely to be inferior, rather superior, perhaps at times. So it turns out interesting with Mindovg too.

                        No data - nothing to compare.
      2. +3
        30 March 2023 14: 20
        I could not even imagine such a thing.
        Eduard, "Samsonism" did its job. There was an article about the ON, the indicated author, about two years ago, he wrote a lot of what is reflected in the comments, many of your "opponents". You yourself understand what was written in it. ON, alternative The Moscow state and a lot of other crap. And there is no need to introduce. smile hi Look at my "innocent" comment, how many minuses are posted, but not a single objection from the miners laughing
        1. 0
          30 March 2023 15: 23
          Quote: parusnik
          ON, an alternative to the Moscow state ...
          ... Look at my "innocent" comment, how many minuses are posted

          At some stage, the GDL was in fact an alternative to Moscow - and the struggle between them was for the unification of Russian lands. I emphasize - at some point...
          The cons are not mine ... wink wink
  10. +3
    30 March 2023 11: 38
    Initially, there was a "Russian-Lithuanian" principality.
  11. +5
    30 March 2023 11: 49
    Thanks to Eduard, as usual, for the article, but there are more than enough controversial points in it.
    I have not read the comments yet, first I will go through the text of the article itself.
    The right to the capital of the Russian state was always supported and defended by the grand dukes of the northeast, even when Kyiv and the surrounding territories were occupied by Lithuania, and then became part of the Commonwealth.

    The thesis is controversial. There is nothing in the sources known to me about the interests of the Vladimir princes in Kyiv after the Mongol pogrom. perhaps I'm missing something. After the departure of Alexander Nevsky from Kyiv, the Russian princes were not there or nothing is known about them. Probably Kyiv was ruled directly from the Horde. After the occupation of Kyiv by Olgerd, he firmly became part of the ON, later the Republic of Poland and interest in him from the Russian rulers appeared only during the time of Alexei Mikhailovich.
    Next.
    Lithuanian tribes (Aukstaite)

    I don’t really understand what “Lithuanian tribes” means. There is a group of tribes of Baltic origin: Lithuanians, Yotvingians, Samogitians, Aukshaits, Latgalians, Galindas, Prussians and others... Are these Lithuanian tribes? But why, then, did the author single out the Aukshaits, and not, for example, the Yotvingians? In relation to Galich and Volhynia, they would be more logical - it was with them that Daniil Romanovich and his descendants had to deal. Samogitians, Aukshaits and Prussians lived to the west and communicated mainly with Germans and Poles. Lithuania proper lived north of the Yotvingians and east of the Samogitians, and in the east of this area of ​​the Baltic tribes lived the Latgalls and Galinds (Russian golyads). Their lands reached right up to the modern Moscow region.
    A tribal union is formed, which some researchers mistakenly consider a "state"

    I have already gotten used to the idea that Eduard and I have different views on the very concept of the state, and, accordingly, on the processes of its formation, etc. In my opinion, on the territory of Rus', the state was formed, at the latest, during the time of Yaroslav the Wise, after which it broke up into several independent entities, each of which can be considered a sovereign state. One of these states, which formalized their independence the very first, was the Principality of Polotsk, which, in fact, was the source of Lithuanian statehood. That is, we can talk about the "Lithuanian state" either starting from the reign of Vseslav of Polotsk, when Lithuania became part of the Polotsk principality (Polotsk state), or, if we want to "delay" this issue, from the moment the center of political power of the Polotsk-Lithuanian state was transferred from Polotsk to the west to the region of Vilna and Novogrudok, which occurred in the first half of the XNUMXth century.
    Already at the end of the XNUMXth century, the once powerful Russian Principality of Polotsk, now divided into Vitebsk and Polotsk, fell under the control of Lithuania for the first time.

    The Principality of Polotsk collapsed already under the children of Vseslav Charodey, that is, at the beginning of the XNUMXth century. The main parts are the Minsk, Drutsk and Vitebsk principalities, whose representatives have been challenging each other for power over Polotsk for a hundred years. The author, apparently considered it necessary to single out the Vitebsk principality, because it several times passed to the Smolensk princes and thus really separated from the Polotsk land, actually joining the Smolensk one. I don't see any other explanation.
    In such circumstances, the city-states, by tradition, began to go to the “row” (agreements) with Lithuania. For example, Polotsk with the Samogitian prince Troynat (Trenyat), the murderer of Mindovg, with Volhynia and Smolensk. The Lithuanian princes, when necessary, pursued a flexible policy, adhering to the principle: "we do not destroy the old, but we do not introduce new ones."

    See above. smile
    We know very little about the origin of the Lithuanian princes. Even if we discard the version of the origin directly from the Polotsk Ruriks in a direct ascending male line, then there is no doubt that marriage alliances were regularly concluded between the Lithuanian princes and the Russians. In cases where we reliably know the origin of a particular Lithuanian prince, this origin is always - I emphasize, always! - mixed, Lithuanian-Russian. Even if we consider Gedemin a pure Lithuanian (we don’t know anything about his origin), then Jagiello is already 75% Russian.
    They "dressed up" (agreed) with a more developed society, so they did not seek to interfere in the sovereign rights of Russian cities at the initial stage.

    Wow! Are we already encroaching on the Magdeburg Law? smile Cities in Rus' have sovereign rights? Honestly, this is the first time I've heard of this. Before that, it was said, even by the author himself, that communal city government in Rus' did not take shape, even in later times, not to mention the XIII - XIV centuries. Unless Novgorod... But Novgorod fell into the sphere of Lithuanian interests only in the XNUMXth century.
    in the battle on the Green Field (Grunwald)

    Rather "in the Green Forest". "Wald" is German for forest. smile
    In the Middle Ages there were not and could not be multi-ethnic states with equality of ethnic groups. Any presence of several ethnic groups in one potestar association was determined by a strict hierarchy, where there were subordinate and dominant ethnic groups.

    Again, there is a fundamental disagreement.
    From the sources it clearly follows that the Slavs, the Balts, the Finno-Ugric peoples, and the Turks lived on the territory of Rus', but there is absolutely no news that these or those peoples were in a preferable position. Taxes were sheared in the same way, from Vodi or Izhora, from Vyatichi or Krivichi, from shanks, from Berendey. Yes, there were more Slavs and in the end they all became Slavic. But, God forbid, I don’t see any special position of the Slavic tribes against the background of non-Slavic ones either in the XNUMXth century. nor in XV.
    Novgorod and Pskov took tribute from the Finnish tribes, Polotsk and Smolensk - from the Baltic, Suzdal and Rostov - from the Finno-Ugric peoples. Galich, Vladimir and Volyn - from the Balts.

    Novgorod and Pskov took tribute from the Estonians, Chuds, Tavasts (for some time, until the Swedes intercepted), but these are lands remote from Novgorod, where they did not succeed and did not want to plant their own administration. Izhora, Vod, all, Korela, those who sat closer, paid not tribute, but taxes and were quite equal subjects of the Novgorod principality or republic, as you like. The same can be said about the rest of the author's example. Merya paid tax, Mordvinians paid tribute. Golyad - tax, Latgalians - tribute, etc. All envy from the proximity of the political center.
    it was with the Tatars, when using the Russian forces for the Russian lands, that Lithuania fought the Horde.

    One hundred years of continuous Russian-Lithuanian wars, starting with Olgerd's campaigns against Moscow in 1368-1372. and the union of Jagiello with Mamai in 1380, where are we going? smile
    Further, the author writes that the reason for the unification of Poland and Lithuania was the threat from the Germans. Certainly, but only one of the reasons. A no lesser threat was from the side of the Steppe and from the side of Rus', which had already gone a long way towards unification around Moscow. The external threat, of course, affected, but the main reason for the unification was precisely the randomly dropped dynastic alignments. Rarely will anyone refuse if he is offered the crown of a neighboring kingdom - just like that, for nothing. And if Vytautas had a capable heir, the union, most likely, would have shattered to pieces. Only and exclusively the aristocracy of Poland and the supreme rulers of Lithuania itself were interested in the unification of Poland and Lithuania - and they agreed. Dynastic layouts have significantly contributed to this. There were no social, economic or military prerequisites for the creation of a union, and not just a military-political union of equal states.
    Phew... Work hard...
    Edward, please do not pay attention to my polemical enthusiasm.
    But still, how differently we perceive the same events... smile
    1. -1
      30 March 2023 12: 06
      One of these states, which formalized their independence the very first, was the Principality of Polotsk, which, in fact, was the source of Lithuanian statehood. That is, we can talk about the "Lithuanian state" either starting from the reign of Vseslav of Polotsk, when Lithuania became part of the Polotsk principality (Polotsk state), or, if we want to "delay" this issue, from the moment the center of political power of the Polotsk-Lithuanian state was transferred from Polotsk to the west to the Vilna region

      And where can you find out about how Lithuania became part of the Polotsk principality, about the center of the Polotsk-Lithuanian state in Polotsk, and about the Polotsk-Lithuanian state itself?
      1. +1
        30 March 2023 13: 20
        Quote: Engineer
        Where can you find out

        As usual, I will not answer for sure. smile
        From memory: for the first time I encountered such a concept with Alekseev in his history of the Polotsk land. Interested, I followed the links, found several articles, including by Lithuanian historians, where this topic is presented in more detail. I was surprised that they recognize the Russian origin of the Lithuanian statehood, although they are trying to lengthen their history by a couple of centuries at the expense of the Principality of Polotsk. They give a hypothesis about the origin of Mindovg from the Ruriks, although they recognize it as unproven. They list marriages known to us between Lithuanians and Rurikovich, cases of participation of Lithuanian troops in Russian strife and under the command of Russian princes, etc.
        In short, they prove the integration of the Lithuanian nobility with the Rurikoviches, sufficient to consider the Lithuanian land itself integrated into the Polotsk principality. And the fact that the latter had all the signs of a sovereign state since the time of Bryachislav Izyaslavich is beyond doubt for me.
        Here I found the materials of my unpublished cycle about the Polotsk principality. Accidentally ended up on this computer.
        The issue of Lithuania joining the Polotsk state in the research literature has not been fully resolved, although, in my opinion, it is of significant importance, because, arguing on this topic, we are actually talking about the origins of Lithuanian statehood, that is, about the formation of that substrate, on which, in two centuries, the Grand Duchy of Lithuania and Russia will rise and grow, the limits of which by the middle of the XNUMXth century. will stretch from the Baltic to the Black Sea and which will play a huge role in the history of not only Russia, but Europe as a whole.
        In favor of the point of view about the Russian origins of Lithuanian statehood, many facts testify, both archaeological (the appearance of Lithuanian tribes in the habitat during this period of Slavic antiquities) and indirect data from written sources, such as constant references to the presence of Lithuanian contingents in the army Polotsk princes, as well as the routes of the invasion of Lithuanian tribes into the territory of Smolensk and Novgorod lands, which began at the end of the XNUMXth - beginning of the XNUMXth centuries. During this period, the Lithuanian rati passed through the Polotsk lands without hindrance, while the Polotsk principality itself was by no means helpless in the military sense. Given the long-standing and ongoing enmity of Polotsk with Novgorod, and later with Smolensk, whose princes constantly interfered in the internal affairs of the Polotsk princely house, such Lithuanian campaigns can be regarded not as independent initiatives of individual tribal leaders, but precisely as an aggressive policy of the Polotsk principality towards neighbors.
        Such a formulation of the question also allows us to take a somewhat different look at the process of joining the Russian lands (primarily Polotsk) to the Lithuanian state, and in later times - the reign of Gediminas and his descendants. From this point of view, we can consider this process not as the expansion of the Lithuanian princes into Russian lands, but as the restoration of the integrity of the Polotsk state of the times of Vseslav Bryachislavich after the shift of the center of power of this state from Polotsk to Vilna, just as the center of power of the ancient Russian state shifted in its time from Kiev to the Rostov-Suzdal land.

        The list of used literature includes:
        Alekseev L. V. "Polotsk land: (Essays on the history of northern Belarus) in the XNUMXth-XNUMXth centuries."
        Bredis M., Tyanina E. "Own filthy". Lithuania under the rule of the Principality of Polotsk in the XNUMXth-XNUMXth centuries.
        Gorsky A.A. "Russian lands in the XIII-XIV centuries: ways of political development"
        Dubonis A. Two models of Lithuanian expansion in Rus' (XIII - early XIV century)
        Kirpichnikov A. N. "Polotsk according to written and archaeological sources: a variant of a new understanding"
        Rapov O. M. "Princely possessions in Rus' in the X - the first half of the XIII century."
        Tatishchev, V. N. "Russian History"
        Khrustalev D.G. "Northern Crusaders. Rus' in the struggle for spheres of influence in the Eastern Baltic in the XII-XIII centuries.
        1. +3
          30 March 2023 14: 51
          The entire collection of Lithuanian news in Russian chronicles is summarized by Pashuto in this work.
          https://prussia.online/books/obrazovanie-litovskogo-gosudarstva
          as constant references to the presence of Lithuanian contingents in the army of the Polotsk princes

          "Permanent" is already once in the entire 12th century. - 1180 year.
          But there is news from 1162 - the Lithuanians are listed as the army of Volodar in Gorodets. Opponents were suddenly Rogvolod with Polotsk. The defeat of Polotsk was such that Rogvolod did not dare to return to Polotsk.

          such Lithuanian campaigns can be regarded not as independent initiatives of individual tribal leaders, but precisely as an aggressive policy of the Polotsk principality towards its neighbors.

          Zero campaigns of Lithuania for the 12th century, according to the source above. The aggressive policy of the Principality of Polotsk and its Lithuanian vassals-accomplices is rushing from all the cracks.
          Go ahead
          Almost the first news about the campaign of Lithuania on Russian lands is from Dlugosh under 1216 - Lithuanians, plundered the outskirts of Polotsk are defeated by the Smolensk.

          I don’t know about you, but it’s hard for me to imagine how it’s possible not to get into the sources.

          They give a hypothesis about the origin of Mindovg from the Ruriks


          This is from the genealogy of the Resurrection Chronicle of the 16th century. Will we also consider the version of the origin of the Roman family of Palemonovich?
          Presumably Mindovg's father is Dovagerd. "Great King of Lithuanians". Mindovg himself - "King of Lithuania"
          In general, it is absolutely incomprehensible how the pagans with Baltic names turned out of the Ruriks. Having established himself to the heap in Novgorod and Polotsk, Mindovg was baptized according to the Latin rite. No other way than the connection with the Orthodox Principality of Polotsk, which existed for many generations, manifested itself.
          1. +3
            30 March 2023 16: 37
            Denis, why so much fighting enthusiasm? smile
            In fact, there are many reports in the annals that can be interpreted as indirect evidence of the presence of Lithuania in the political life of Polotsk. For example, the campaigns of Mstislav the Great in Lithuania as part of his actions to pacify the Polotsk princes.
            In 1162 and 1180, the mention of Lithuanians in the Russian troops is by no means limited. In 1167, the Lithuanians were mentioned in the army of Volodar Glebovich in the battle with Vseslav Vasilkovich. One can recall the first campaign of Vladimir Polotsky to Riga in 1204 or 1205. There, too, among his soldiers were Lithuanian detachments. In 1213, the Lithuanians, led by the Dovgerd you mentioned (whether he was the father of Mindovg is a moot point, but the fact that he was Vsevolod Herzigsky’s father-in-law is yes), help Dovgerd’s son-in-law Vsevolod fight off the Germans. And these are only those cases where Lithuania is specifically mentioned. I think all this news is enough to talk about the close involvement of Lithuania in the Polotsk affairs.
            Quote: Engineer
            Lithuanians plundering the outskirts of Polotsk

            I somehow don’t know about the events of 1216. This year, the prince changed in Polotsk - Vladimir died and who came to replace him is not very clear. Apparently, in this case we are dealing with a banal strife, in which Lithuania supported one candidate for the Polotsk table, and Smolensk supported another.
            I did not seriously talk about the origin of the Lithuanian princes from the Ruriks, I just mentioned that there is such a version, but no one takes it seriously. But if you name me at least one Lithuanian prince, whose father and mother would be reliably Lithuanian (even Vitovt is still a quarter Russian - through his father smile), I'm very surprised.
            1. +2
              30 March 2023 18: 29
              In fact, there are many reports in the annals that can be interpreted as indirect evidence of the presence of Lithuania in the political life of Polotsk.

              It may or may not be interpreted. Before formulating any hypothesis, it is necessary to highlight the facts.
              For example, the campaigns of Mstislav the Great in Lithuania as part of his actions to pacify the Polotsk princes.

              This is the correct question. If the Lithuanians were in the orbit of the Principality of Polotsk, then the connection should be two-way. And any campaign against Lithuania was supposed to evoke a response from the Polotsk princes. Alas, no connection is visible. Mstislav's campaign against Lithuania took place two years after the campaign against Polotsk and a year after the campaign against the Estonians. It's better to just assume that Mstislav went hiking because he could. No connection can be seen in the campaigns against the Yotvingians of Roman Mstislavich in 1196 and Rurik Rostislavich in Lithuania in 1190 (the prince stayed at a party and the campaign did not take place). In all cases, silence was spoken about.
              In 1162 and 1180, the mention of Lithuanians in the Russian troops is by no means limited. In 1167, the Lithuanians were mentioned in the army of Volodar Glebovich in the battle with Vseslav Vasilkovich

              Is it? Help me find this place. I did not find a word about Lithuania in the Ipatiev Chronicle.
              http://krotov.info/acts/12/pvl/ipat22.htm
              In the same year, Volodar Glѣbovich went to Polotsk, Vasilkovich's army 52 Vseslav went against. him with Polchanı 53 Volodar ovѣdav . already 54 go against him. don't let him s'vkupitisѧ. and hit 55 on them ̑ from iznezapı. and beat them a lot and inuh with the hands of izoimasha. Vseslav fled Vitebsk 56 . Volodar is inside. in Poltesk 57 . and tsѣlova hrs̑t 58 with Poltsanı K 59. and go to Vitebsk on Dv҃da and on Vseslav. and having come and 1Forward 2 and started to beat the river. Dv҃d the darkness did not give him a regiment outside 3 of his brother 4 Roman. s 5 Smolnѧnı. behold it is marvelous to see [II, 94] at midnight. bıs̑ the thunder is strong. As we howl wandering through the 6th river. and fear of an attack on Volodarev'. and rekosha squad Volodarevı 7 that you stand kn҃zhe not going away. a se ti sѧ Roman. to roam and ѿsuda 8 . Dvd҃b and run Volodar ѿ Vitebsk 9 and in the morning saw Dvd҃v And ѡzhe 10 Volodar fled. and let them go. and did not comprehend them, but in the forest 11 there are a lot of fornicators 12 . isoimasha 13 . and Vseslav ambassador to Polotsk

              I found another episode from the Novgorod Chronicle not mentioned by Pashuto from 1198
              In the same autumn, the Polochians came with Lithuania to Luki and burned the mansions

              A total of three episodes of joint Russian-Lithuanian actions for the entire 12th century. Two of them with polochans.

              It is possible to recall the first campaign of Vladimir Polotsky to Riga in 1204 or 1205. There, too, among his soldiers were Lithuanian detachments. In 1213, the Lithuanians, led by the Dovgerd you mentioned

              Not certainly in that way. Lithuanians are mentioned for Vsevolod, not for Vladimir
              In the same summer, the king of Polotsk suddenly appeared in Livonia with an army and laid siege to the castle of Ikeskola [Ikskile

              King Gertsike [Jersika] (Gercike), (34) approaching Riga with the Lithuanians,

              This is the crucial moment. Lithuanians help Dovagerd's father-in-law, but I did not find any information about helping the prince of Polotsk himself by searching through the text of Gnenrich Lavisky
              In 1213, the Lithuanians, led by Dovgerd you mentioned (whether he was the father of Mindovg is a moot point, but the fact that he was Vsevolod Herzigsky’s father-in-law is yes), help Dovgerd’s son-in-law fight back

              Where did you get it from? In 1213 Dovgerd was captured and committed suicide. Heinrich has no other information about him.
              1203 - the campaign against Riga is the only mention of the joint actions of Lithuanians and Russians. And at the same time NOT polochan.
              https://www.castle.lv/hroniki/genrih-latvijsky.html
              Moreover, Heinrich assures that Vladimir concluded peace with the inhabitants of Riga, including against the Lithuanians.
              Finally, the king, perhaps by divine inspiration, gave the Bishop the whole of Livonia without a word, so that eternal peace would be strengthened between them, both against the Lithuanians and against other pagans, and the free way along the Dvina was always open to merchants. Having finished with this, the king with the merchants and all his people went up the Dvina and happily returned to his city of Polotsk.


              I think all this news is enough to talk about the close involvement of Lithuania in the Polotsk affairs.

              There is very little news. No close involvement is visible at all. individual episodes.

              Apparently, in this case we are dealing with a banal strife, in which Lithuania supported one candidate for the Polotsk table, and Smolensk supported another.

              Pure speculation. There is zero information about this in the text.
              1. +4
                30 March 2023 19: 42
                I will clarify about Volodar. I took it, apparently, from Alekseev, and although I usually check the links, I don’t remember what he referred to here.
                As for the rest, one must understand that the Polotsk principality since the time of Vseslav has never been united under one hand. After the death of Vseslav, his children immediately quarreled, and began to seek help in various directions - the Vitebsk branch mingled with Smolensk, the Drutskaya branch more with Kiev, while the Minsk branch was supported more often than others by Lithuania. The Polotsk table was seized alternately by one, then the other, then the third branch of the descendants of Vseslav.
                The genealogy of the Polotsk house is full of gaps, but many researchers believe that the princes Gertsike and Kukeynos - Vsevolod and Vyachko, respectively, were representatives of the Minsk branch, hence the traditional support from Lithuania.
                Concerning the assistance of Lithuania in 1213 to Prince Vsevolod. Henry of Latvia does not mention Dovgerd in that article, so the search in the text did not pass. It literally says the following:
                Quote: Engineer
                There is very little news. No close involvement is visible at all. individual episodes.

                This is someone who evaluates. Taken together, a general analysis of all available information, it seems to me, gives a very unambiguous picture.
                For 60 years - more than five references to the participation of Lithuanians in Polotsk affairs. Tight dynastic ties. The routes of the Lithuanian detachments through the Polotsk lands - the picture is emerging, perhaps not entirely clear, since there is really little direct evidence, but quite unambiguous, in my opinion. I am not very familiar with the archaeological evidence of the presence of Russians on the lands of Lithuania, but Alekseev considers them. In short, indirect evidence, in my opinion, is absolutely enough to speak with confidence about the integration of the Lithuanian elite in the Polotsk affairs.
                1. +1
                  30 March 2023 20: 34
                  Yes, the episode with Maynard is the second episode of the help of the Lithuanians to Vsevolod (Although Dovagerd has nothing to do with it, he died a year ago, but it doesn’t matter, Maynard died in 1214)
                  So, there is no help to Vladimir of Polotsk, on the contrary, the Lithuanians are at least twice called his enemies
                  Vsevolod and Vyachko, respectively, were representatives of the Minsk branch, hence the traditional support from Lithuania

                  Where did Lithuanian support for Vyachko come from? They are Henry's enemies
                  When the king of Kukenois [Koknese] Vyachko (Vesceka) heard about the arrival of the bishop and the pilgrims, he, along with his people, went out to meet them and, upon arrival in Riga, was received by everyone with honor. After spending many days in the most friendly atmosphere in the Bishop's house, ohand finally asked the bishop to help him against the attacks of the Lithuanians, offering for this half of his land and his castle. This was accepted, the bishop honored the king with many gifts, promised him help with people and weapons, and the king returned home with joy.

                  You can draw an intermediate conclusion. Henry of Latvia, our most detailed source on affairs in the Baltics, does not write about the subjugation of Lithuanians to the Russians. At the same time, he writes quite clearly about such subordination for the Latvians and part of the Estonians.
                  Lithuanians are called enemies of Vladimir and Vyachko. Allies only Vsevolod. And this is understandable given the family ties. Lithuanians, obviously, look like the third vertex of a triangle with their own interests. And not the periphery of Polotsk
                  The routes of the Lithuanian detachments through the Polotsk lands - the picture is emerging, maybe not entirely clear, since there is really little direct evidence, but quite unambiguous, in my opinion

                  Two episodes. Lithuanians were brought by the Polotsk people in 1198 and 1180. There is no information about the raids of the Lithuanians without indicating the Polotsk people while Polotsk was strong.
                  I am not very familiar with archaeological evidence of the presence of Russians on the lands of Lithuania, but Alekseev considers them

                  Rather the opposite. According to archeology, Baltic antiquities come close to Grodno
                  The answer is simple. The border of Lithuanian settlement in the middle of the XNUMXth century ran much southeast of the modern Lithuanian-Belarusian border. Both archaeological and linguistic data indicate that the lands of the Grodno Principality at the indicated time were inhabited by Lithuanians and related Yotvingians, who underwent Slavic assimilation already in the late medieval period. That is, Grodno of the XII century was a stronghold of the Polotsk authorities in Lithuania, similarly to Jersika in Latgale

                  http://a-nevsky.ru/library/orden-mechenoscev-protiv-rusi-perviy-germanskiy-pohod-na-vostok9.html
                  Undoubtedly, the princes of Polotsk controlled some kind of border zone with the Lithuanians, but it is quite obvious that the participation of the Lithuanians in Russian affairs until the beginning of the 13th century was limited to very rare episodes.
                  With the decline of the Principality of Polotsk at the beginning of the 13th century, the Lithuanians became more active. The geography of their raids is huge, and the lands of the Polotsk principality are the object of expansion.

                  Most importantly, in raids on Russian lands, cooperation with Russian contingents at the beginning of the 13th century is no longer mentioned. Haven't found any evidence yet.
                  The conclusion is clear enough. There was no Polotsk-Lithuanian principality-state, and Polotsk at the best of times served rather as a factor restraining Lithuanian expansion
        2. -2
          30 March 2023 16: 42
          I advise you not to be clever and not to write nonsense. There were Western Balts and Eastern ones. And they even spoke different languages.
          Where do you draw your revelations from? Send me a link. I also want to be as pinched as you are.
      2. -2
        30 March 2023 16: 24
        Nowhere, naturally. This author just came up with in the heat of his imagination. Ostap, so to speak, suffered. This is from a great desire to show his AGRAMAD mind. Forgive him, because he does not know what he writes.
    2. -1
      30 March 2023 12: 24
      I have already gotten used to the idea that Eduard and I have different views on the very concept of the state, and, accordingly, on the processes of its formation, etc.

      Michael I welcome you
      Phew... Work hard...

      Let me not answer.
      And then another article will turn out.
      There were also comments that Lithuanians had nothing to do with ON.
      hi
      1. -1
        30 March 2023 13: 34
        Yes, Edward, my respect. hi
        Quote: Eduard Vaschenko
        Let me not answer.

        As you wish. There is someone to fight with without me. smile
    3. +3
      30 March 2023 14: 17
      Quote: Trilobite Master
      zhora, vod, all, korela, those who sat closer, paid not tribute, but taxes and were quite equal subjects of the Novgorod principality or republic, as you like. The same can be said about the rest of the author's example. Merya paid tax, Mordvinians paid tribute. Golyad - tax, Latgalians - tribute, etc. All envy from the proximity of the political center.

      Good afternoon, Michael!
      I believe that it does not depend on the proximity of the political center, but on the arbitrary and artificial division of the same phenomenon into different parts, something like this: Mordovia pays tribute, and Mari El pays taxes. Or: Primorsky Krai pays tribute, the Urals pay taxes, and the Moscow Region pays nothing at all.
      Immediately, it seems to me that we need to decide: either taxes or tribute. hi
      1. +1
        30 March 2023 14: 43
        Quote: Mihaylov
        it is necessary to decide: either taxes or tribute.

        Where there is a permanent administration in the form of some kind of tyun and a couple of bailiffs in the graveyard, there are taxes. Where there is no such thing, but instead, a group of tribute-payers arrives once a year in the form of an armed detachment - a tribute. I kind of imagine it this way.
  12. -2
    30 March 2023 12: 06
    Lots of historical errors. The author imposes his opinion more, how it would be better for him, so that it would be so. In fact, the Aukshtuits did not exist. In any case, they are not found anywhere in the Russian Chronicles. There were only Zhamoits, described in the Chronicles as Zhmud, who lived in the North-East of modern Lithuania, limited with the Orders. They called Aukstaits all the eastern Russians, Slavs, current Belarusians inhabiting the Polotsk Principality at that time, including in the East of present-day Lithuania and the North of Belarus. Lithuania - the name itself came from Black Rus', that is, the modern Grodno region, and the area in this region was called. Novogrudok Russian Principality and Gorodnyanskoe Russian Principality, etc. The western lands of Black Rus' were united by Pagan Slavs, in fact the same Russians who just did not have time to accept Christianity. Black Rus' - this was Lithuania, and was called so, because Christianity practically did not reach them, and there were also Pagan Slavic rites, culture, and the language was Russian. Lithuania is a new formation of the Russian Polotsk Principalities, since Polotsk became weak and no longer controlled anything in its territories. After, 100 years later, when a new Capital was built on the Vilna River, the Capital was transferred from the city of Novogrudok to Vilna, and the country became known as the Grand Duchy of Lithuania and was formed simultaneously with the Grand Duchy of Moscow. That is, that the Muscovites that the Lithuanians were Russian and competed for the Possession of the Russian land and. Both Principalities had Russian as the main language and Orthodoxy in the majority of citizens. The prefix Russian Principality VKL and Russian Principality VKM must be mandatory for these states. And modern Lithuania borrowed this name only after the Revolution. In fact, Lithuania is the name of the Slavic lands, like the Volga, Kuban, Urals, Polissya, that is, the territory of the Russian lands.
  13. -2
    30 March 2023 12: 15
    Quote: Edward Vashchenko
    Quote from Tim666
    Lithuanians are modern Belarusians
    More correctly - Lithuanians. And Belarus, rather, is the successor of ON ...


    The principality was called the Grand Duchy of Lithuania, the princes were Lithuanians, and ... Belarus is the heiress?
    Why not Ukraine? Yes, I heard such nonsense in Belarus on every corner. To the question:
    so you, we? (my ancestors from Belarus) were krepaks, but pans, gentry Lithuanians, yes Poles? You yourself tell on excursions: the gentry get drunk and, having nothing to do, go through the village to flog the peasants?

    They lower their eyes modestly and keep quiet.
    The text of the article is about Svidrigailo, were these Russian territories again fighting for the Lithuanian inheritance?
    The Slavs in this principality were a subordinate element, and from the end of the XNUMXth century. and at all become krepaks among the Poles, Lithuanians and all sorts of Ostrozhskys and Vishnevetskys who became Polonized.
    And how do they treat their inheritance showed Bohdan Khmelnitsky during the liberation war, did they fight there with their inheritance like that?
    Yes, and in 1939, even before the arrival of the Soviet Army, Belarusians with pitchforks ran after "their heritage"?

    Uncle, Samogitia - the lands of modern Lithuania became part of the GDL after the Battle of Grunwald, and your treatise is an attempt to pull an owl on a globe, there was no written Samogitian or Aukshait language, the document flow was carried out in Old Belarusian, but were Lithuanians in the modern sense to know? The only sign that supporters of a certain dominance of the Aukshaits-Lithuanians are actively pressing on is the origin of Prince Mindovg, but there are no less questions than with the origin of Rurik. But even if Mindovg is of Aukshait or Samogitian origin, did he bring some ruling class with him? Well then, Rus' was enslaved by the Varangians because Rurik brought with him to know which dominated the Slavs) Are you serious about the Polonized Ostrozhskys? The Ostrozhskys are one of the most ardent supporters of Orthodoxy in the Grand Duchy of Lithuania, by the way, there was no Polonization in fact, the only question was religion, and they came up with this same Polonization under Catherine 2, when Belarusian Catholics began to be called Poles, and Uniates were forcibly driven into Orthodoxy. They oppressed the Slavs - is it okay that the Poles are also Slavs? To begin with, read what and who the gentry is, for which they were recorded in the gentry class. About the gentry, they went to flog the peasants - on the territory of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania, the share of the gentry was about a third of the population, and most of the gentry differed little from the peasant class in terms of well-being. Did these poor gentry flog foreign serfs or free peasants?
    Khmelnytsky's liberation war - sort of like myths about some kind of liberation war have long been debunked, maybe enough cripples from imperial and Soviet textbooks.
    1. -1
      30 March 2023 12: 46
      Uncle, Samogitia - the lands of modern Lithuania became part of the GDL after the Battle of Grunwald, and your treatise is an attempt to pull an owl on a globe, there was no written Samogitian or Aukshait language, the document flow was carried out in Old Belarusian, but were Lithuanians in the modern sense to know?


      I look, my nephew skipped the whole school, what can I say ... laughing
      1. +1
        30 March 2023 13: 11
        Quote: Eduard Vaschenko

        I look, my nephew skipped the whole school, what can I say ...

      2. Fat
        +1
        30 March 2023 13: 15
        Quote: Eduard Vaschenko
        I look, my nephew skipped the whole school, what can I say ...

        - Didn't flog when it was necessary? wassat I think that Timur is trying to promote some of his interests, strenuously trying to portray that there is a "different opinion" that is different from the Soviet, imperial and folkhistorical views established in the history section. He cannot say anything sane, due to lack of erudition. But there are emotions and a support group. request
    2. +1
      30 March 2023 13: 41
      Quote from Tim666
      Uncle, Samogitia - the lands of modern Lithuania became part of the ON after the Battle of Grunwald

      Samogitia in 1398 was handed over by Vytautas to the Germans in exchange for help against Jagiello. Under the rule of the Germans (conditional, because there were constant uprisings), she was only twelve years old.
      Teach materiel.
  14. 0
    30 March 2023 12: 27
    Quote: Edward Vashchenko
    Lithuanians with Samogitians sat there in the farms and did not stick out anywhere.

    Which farms? What scientific papers say this?
    The main ethnic element of the ON was the Slavs...

    Undoubtedly, the main but subordinate element, over time, as I wrote in this article, this led to a completely difficult situation: the endless uprisings of the XNUMXth and XNUMXth centuries. testify to this, and everything ends with an uprising led by Bogdan Khmelnitsky, such a "synergy" of ethnic groups.
    If some are for the farms, others are the main ones, why oppose the farms?

    Well, also write that Bogdan Khmelnitsky raised an uprising for faith and the Slavs)))
  15. +3
    30 March 2023 13: 16
    Quote: Edward Vashchenko
    there are some inaccuracies and inconsistencies in the article.
    Firstly, the Grand Duchy of Lithuania has nothing in common with present-day Lithuania. ON was one of the many old Russian principalities, fragmented and not united into one Russian state of the Old Slavic lands, and in fact all the main historical artifacts and historical objects of this ON are now located on the territory of present-day Belarus. And in Lithuania, realizing that now Lithuania is falsifying history, they thank God that Lukashenko was the chairman of the collective farm and not a doctor of historical sciences ...

    Good afternoon,
    there are no inaccuracies in the article.
    Let's, as our president said, separate the flies from the cutlets.
    Firstly, only nationalists, bourgeois nationalists, are engaged in the justification of historical roots in order to prove to other nationalists that they are ogogo and egege.
    And nothing else.
    Yes, historians can also “tweak” history, they can have one view or another, depending on political preferences.
    But back to ON. There are several views on what it was. Key, it was a “confederation”, a union of Lithuania and Russian lands: we do not destroy the old, we do not introduce new ones.
    Or the Russian-Lithuanian state (a rudimentary or early state. For most of my life, I also clearly adhered to this view and direction in history.
    What's wrong here? Not so, and I wrote in an article about the alternative, it turns out that there was an alternative, the Russians could all have fun living as part of the ON, for example, having captured Moscow during the “Lithuanian land” of the 60s. XNUMXth century?
    If there were no further development in history, we would agree: yes, it was a kind of confederation of Russians and Lithuanians.
    But ... history has put the GDL before a choice of how to develop further, within the GDL and assimilate each other to everyone, would the Russians have done it more likely, or is there another way?
    And it was the Lithuanian nobility with the king who chose the path of union with a more developed state in the West, if you describe events very straightforwardly, with Poland. And the Russian lands, as subordinate to Lithuania, took this path, having fought a little with Svidrigailo, but still obeying their LORD, THE GRAND DUKE OF LITHUANIA. So that's what happened.
    And finally, of course, the modern Lithuanian people - the direct descendants of that Lithuania, the Belarusians, the descendants of those Russian city-states of Black Rus', Minsk and Polotsk, who submitted to Lithuania, lived in the ON, but not Lithuanians. hi

    in my comment there is not a word that Belarusians are Lithuanians. My only comment is that the ratio of historical artifacts and historical objects in the territories of present-day Belarus and Lithuania is approximately 10:1! . And in the Grand Duchy of Lithuania, office work was conducted and they spoke in the old Belarusian, the western dialect of the old Russian old Slavic language. The Lithuanian language in the GDL has never been a state language, although it did exist. So what kind of Belarusians are Lithuanians or vice versa. But the territory on which there are the main historical objects of the principality and the language in which state and public life is conducted voluntarily and without coercion, this is an indicator of whose land and power it is. So the Belarusians have the right to be the heirs of the ON, in comparison with the current Lithuanians, approximately in a ratio of 10: 1 in many parameters of historical heredity.
    1. +1
      30 March 2023 16: 59
      One should not argue over facts with people who turn to faith as the only source of knowledge.
      The main argument of the sectarian: I believe, I do not believe. And therefore he is the owner of absolute truth, and you with your facts, no.
    2. 0
      30 March 2023 17: 01
      The current Lithuanians simply fussed in their time and fixed the name of their state at the Versailles Peace Conference in 1918.
      And so they have exactly the same relation to ON as the modern inhabitants of Rome have to the Roman Empire.
  16. 0
    30 March 2023 13: 28
    Discussions on the theme of the GDL remind me of the discussions of Normanists and anti-Normanists, as well as disputes between French scientists and German scientists, whether Charlemagne was a Frenchman or a German. These disputes will never dry up, giving yet another reason to write articles and books, and the opposite side to refute them. And commentators write kamenty... wink
    1. 0
      30 March 2023 16: 45
      "We are from the Russian family, Karla, Inegeld, Farlof, Rulav, Guda, Ruald, Karn, Frelav, Ruar, Aktev, Truan, Lidul, Fost, Stemid, and a message from Olga, the Russian Grand Duke ..." (Russian-Greek treaty 911 year, "The Tale of Bygone Years" Moscow, Leningrad, 1950).
  17. +2
    30 March 2023 19: 44
    An interesting topic has been revealed. Now it is clear what and why was in these areas.
  18. -1
    30 March 2023 21: 03
    Inconvenient facts about the genesis of ON
    The Pomeranian prince Bohuslav I in 1214 had a seal that is almost identical to the seal of the GDL "Pursuit". But the most interesting thing is different: the Polish historian Jerzy Dowiat reports:
    “Boguslav I, Prince of Western Pomerania, was titled princeps Liuticorum” (Dowiat J. Pochodzenie dinastii zachodnio-pomorskiej i uksztaltowanie sie terytorium ksiestwa Zachodnio-Pomorskiego. / Przeglad historyczny. Tom XLV. Zeszyt 2-3. Warszawa, 1954).
    I draw your attention to an important circumstance: in the future, the Pomeranian princes no longer had such a title.
    Belarusian historian Zdzisław Sitko interprets this title as “prince of the Lyutichi, Lutitsky”, however, in the Papal Bulls, the kingdom of Mindovga is also referred to as Liutowa, that is, Lutova, half a century later.
    The title of Boguslav I "princeps Liuticorum" allows us to draw the following conclusions.
    1. Until 1219, Lithuania was located not on the territory of the future GDL, but in Western Pomerania. In addition, even there the coat of arms of her princes was "Pursuit".
    2. There, Lithuania clearly meant the Lutva of the Lutichi, and when the Grand Duchy of Lithuania was created by Mindovg in the middle of the XNUMXth century, Lithuania was still called Lutva, thereby retaining an indication of origin from the people of the Lutichi.
    3. From 1214 to 1221, under the pressure of a powerful German-Polish expansion, the Lutiches migrated from Western Pomerania to the Neman (including an unsuccessful attempt to seize the lands of the Eastern Balts of the Skalovites at the mouth of the Neman in Prussia around 1221). Above the Neman in the region of Novogorodka, the princes of the Luticians Ruskevichi and Bulevichi created a new Lithuania.
    An important nuance is that the western Balts of Pomerania were ethnically much closer to the Yotvingians than the Slavs: they were united by a language, a common culture, a common pagan religion. Having come up the Neman to the lands of Yatva, in 1219 the migrants concluded an agreement on borders with the Galician-Volyn princes. In the treaty, the newly arrived princes from Western Pomerania are listed by name. I draw your attention to the fact that they have never been known here before. Like the very name "Lithuania" or "Lutva".
    Prior to Mindovg, the newly-minted Lithuania was ruled by two main clans of the Lutiches: Bulevichi and Ruskevichi. It is clear that they managed to negotiate only with the king of Rus' of Galicia and Volyn (then already isolated from Kyiv and even going to accept Catholicism). But Kyiv and the offspring of the Kyiv princes, who had previously conquered the lands of Novogorodok (Novogrudok) from the local Yotvingians, did not agree with the arrival of strangers here. The war was brewing, the Lutichi Bulevichi and Ruskevichi naturally turned to the King of Prussia (Pogezania) Ringold for help - since he used to be their ally (Prussia, as a former colony of Polabskaya Rus, gathered all migrants from Polabya ​​and Pomerania who left the German-Polish expansion) .
    The conflict between the newly-minted Lithuania of the Luticians and the people of Kiev escalated extremely by 1230: without the help of Prussia, the Luticians could not resist. Apparently, Bulevichi and Ruskevichi promised Ringold (Mindovg's father) certain rights to Lithuania in exchange for its protection from Kyiv.
    In 1230, the Prussian king Ringold came to the aid of Lithuania and fought with the people of Kiev for her freedom. The battle took place on the right bank of the Neman, near the village of Mogilno. The Ukrainian princes David Lutsky and Dmitry Drutsky with their squads were defeated and killed. At the same time, the people in Polotsk rebelled, and Ringold, without much difficulty, annexed it to his new possessions.
    Krivichi and Yotvingians (that is, both parts of the ancient Belarusian ethnic group) hated the people of Kiev and cursed Kiev, from which, although they had already been freed by that time, but whose princes tried to enslave them again and again. It is clear, therefore, that the Krivichi and Yotvingians saw in the Lyutich-Pomors not only their brothers (with the same language and culture), who were very different from the Rusyns of Kiev, but also protection from Kiev.

    A new word in the search for the origins of Lithuania was the first translated into Russian from Latin "The Great Polish Chronicle" of the 1987th-XNUMXth centuries - CHRONICA POLONIAE MAIORIS. In XNUMX, it was published by the publishing house of Moscow University under the editorship of Corresponding Member of the USSR Academy of Sciences V. L. Yanin.
    It turned out that both concepts were erroneous: Mindovg was not a Zhemoyt-Aukshtait, but he was not a Belarusian-Krivich from Polotsk either. In the "Chronicle" Mindovg (Mendolf) is called the Prussian king, who with his Prussians went to our lands from the German-Polish expansion.
    Of course, we are talking about Mindovg as the ruler of the GDL, because in chapter 133, entitled “The chapter on the devastation of Plock land” (Plock is located just east of Warsaw), it is reported how the Porussians (Prussians) attacked Poland from the territory of the GDL:
    “In the same year [1260], the mentioned Mendolph, having gathered a multitude, up to thirty thousand, fighting: his Prussians, Litvins and other pagan peoples, invaded the Masovian land. There, first of all, he ravaged the city of Plock, and then brutally devastated the cities and villages of the entire Plock land with a sword and fire, robbery and robbery. Having also attacked Prussia, he destroyed the cities, destroyed almost the entire land of Prussia, and his baptized Prussians committed a cruel massacre of the Christian people.
    At first glance, it may seem surprising that not only in the Kiev, Polotsk and other "Eastern" chronicles there is not a word about the creation of the ON (which they did not know there for objective reasons), but this is not the case in the chronicles of the Poles and Germans describing the capture them Pomorie and Prussia. A striking picture: a powerful state appears “from scratch” - but no one mentions it.
    The answer, apparently, is that at that time the Poles and Germans saw in it only the flight of the peoples whom they expelled from Polabye, Pomerania and Prussia. They remained the same enemies for them - in the state of the same old war, and therefore the ON was not considered as something "new". It was an old well-known adversary, which was only moving away from expansion further and further east - until it “dug in” in Novogorodok.
    When analyzing the Great Polish Chronicle, it becomes clear that the Prussian king Mendolph-Mindovg described in it had nothing to do with Lithuania (because he went to the Litvins with his Prussian people). And ethnically, he and his people, obviously, were Pogezani (people from Pogezanie), now it is Northern Poland and the Kaliningrad region of Russia. Pogezani are not eastern Balts (not Zhemoits and Aukshtaits), but western Balts, related to the current western Belarussians, in the past - Yatvingians (the Pogezania region itself was attributed to the Upper Yatva of the Yotvingians). Hence the similarity of names: in Western Belarus (Southern Yatva of the Yotvingians), the name Mindovg was also common (which was absent among the Eastern Balts).
  19. The comment was deleted.
  20. +1
    31 March 2023 11: 07
    There will always be someone who will pick up something "that lies badly" ...
  21. 0
    31 March 2023 12: 01
    Let's ask ourselves a very simple question, two to be exact. And we will think very carefully about the answers to them.
    1) if some figures from Kyiv and cities friendly to him recognized as their rulers some Varangians led by Rurik, then the resulting state - whose is it?
    2) if a little later, some figures from Polotsk and friendly cities recognized some Samogitians as their rulers, headed by Mindovg, then the resulting state - whose is it?

    And about the Tatar yoke. Everyone looks at the dates of the invasion - ruined, killed, killed ... And if you look a little earlier? the economy of Kievan Rus, built on north-south transit trade, was already in deep decline, because Byzantium was rapidly impoverished in wars with the Arabs and Turks and it was extremely difficult to live on duties. Nomads just drove the last nail into the coffin.
    Let's compare with the view of a historian 800 years later - there was Yugoslavia and it was bombed in 1998 by NATO. So, it is guilty of the fall of the country. And the fact that there were a lot of problems before that will somehow be erased from memory. Especially that there was tension with writing then and customs declarations are unlikely to have been preserved
  22. +1
    31 March 2023 21: 44
    Quote: Sergey Horuzhik
    The question of the GDL is not historical or even scientific. It is political.

    Not in the eyebrow, but in the eye, you can’t say better! Political. Zmagars, like all Eastern European ethno-nationalists, are unique people in their stubbornness. There is a given - an independent state-in. It would seem that what difference does it make when this independence was obtained, 1000 years ago or last summer, is this a value in itself? Why should the state language be a language that 90% of citizens do not speak? And many more questions offered by the "patriots" answers to which a normal person is taken aback and bewildered. I will clarify so that without insinuations on a national basis - I am not talking about Belarusians, but specifically about a rather narrow circle of tightly fucked up people. There are many similar ones where they suffer, not only in the former. ON
  23. -1
    31 March 2023 22: 04
    "Horses mixed up in a bunch, people" ..

    the article is an assumption based on incorrect premises of the "classical" school of pseudo-history in which all falsifiers have been trampled from the time of Catherine and ending with the Soviet school, who actively sculpted the center of origin of the Russian lands where they themselves were sitting at that time, that is, in Moscow. The Grand Duchy of Lithuania had NOTHING to do with modern Lithuania, but had Polotsk lands in its heart and birth, spreading over time from sea to sea and disappeared after several centuries, having made a fatal mistake - uniting in an alliance against the aggression of Moscow with the Catholic hyena Poland, which brought confusion and, in the end, a treacherous stab in the back. Regarding the author’s words about the political and economic “backwardness” of those regions in comparison with some other “Rus”, I would like to recall that the cities of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania since the 14th century lived in accordance with Magdeburg law, that is, they were ruled by townspeople, which, along with the Novgorod Republic, made the Grand Duchy of Lithuania the earliest democracy in Eastern Europe. As for the Tatar-Mongolians, they received three times in the teeth from the principality and prudently preferred not to interfere anymore.
  24. 0
    April 1 2023 13: 46
    Modern Lithuania is trying to portray the history of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania as autonomous in order to separate the history of Lithuania from the history of Russia ... in fact, in the 13-15th century, the Grand Duchy of Lithuania was in the same space with the Russian principalities and only thanks to Russian recruits achieved military success ... As soon as the Moscow principality returned Smolensk and others. 13-18 century .. In Belarus, the Catholic regions declare themselves the heir of the GDL most of all ... The capital of the GDL was on the territory of Belarus ...
  25. +1
    April 2 2023 15: 27
    The medieval ON was a WESTERN RUSSIAN state (originally Orthodox, and not at all Catholic), where they spoke the WESTERN RUSSIAN LANGUAGE. The Bible printed just 500 years ago by Francis Skaryna can still be read without a dictionary (like many other documents of that time).
    "Western Russian written language is one of the official written and literary languages ​​of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania from the 1696th century to XNUMX." Peter was already king - and there they still remembered their native Russian language !!!
    And all sorts of Samogitians, Aushkaits, Zemgals and other Curonians (ancestors of modern Lithuanians and Latvians) 700 years ago still lived in a tribal system, were pagans, and only in the 15th century accepted Christianity.
  26. -1
    April 3 2023 17: 01
    Class, finally, not the discussion of SVO, but information because of which this SVO, apparently, has begun.
  27. The comment was deleted.
  28. +2
    April 4 2023 22: 12
    The main meaning of this description of the legends of ancient times is grief to the vanquished. And the winner is the one who laughs last, takes it all. In this regard, it’s just interesting, and where is the horde now, including great Poland? You can answer in rhyme!
    1. 0
      April 5 2023 12: 24
      Oh how! in rhyme)
      They are so different victories .. the genocide of 2 million Armenians, the victory of the Hutu over the Tutsis under the instigation of the "white masters", the victory of NATO in Yugoslavia, the victory of the white rabble over the indigenous peoples of North America who came out to meet the ships and revered them as gods, the victory of rapists over the raped ..
      Laughing and referring to victorious maxims, do not forget to look around - what if another "last" is already attached there ..
  29. 0
    April 5 2023 01: 09
    It is high time to introduce the concept of the Polish-Lithuanian yoke into Russian historiography.
  30. 0
    April 8 2023 07: 07
    Why comrade. Vashchenko and the scientific school he represents do not at all consider the issue of belonging to the lands of Brandenburg and to the west as part of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania, their occupation, and further in the text - is this probably an act of grant-eating or something else? Thank you