Moscow´s Genocide of Belarusian nation. Terrifying reading, but I am 100% sure you did not read about it in your school , its still taboo subject in Belarus sorry, for using stright forward google traslate : "After World War II, the 10-million-strong Belarus lost about 3 million of its inhabitants, but about 2 million were killed even before the war by the communist NKVD. In Belarus, 70 percent of all Belarusian writers were physically destroyed, scientists and artists were killed. (The troupe of the Third Belarusian State Theater of Vladislav Golubok was arrested in full force. Almost all of them were shot.) They were killed on ethnic grounds. For this, the label "natsdem" was invented (it means - a national democrat, although such a party did not exist). This label was stuck to all Belarusians whom the Stalinists planned to destroy. In the depths of the NKVD, a non-existent anti-communist organization SVB ("Union of Liberation of Belarus") was invented. Under an invented phantom, the NKVADists carried out arrests, conducted an imaginary investigation, interrogated, tortured, tried, then exiled to Russia and shot innocent people. After the Riga Agreement in 1921, Belarus was divided between Poland and Russia. The division border was drawn not far from Mensk. There was a secret order from the NKVD to destroy the entire Belarusian population along the border. The Russian auxiliaries wanted to create a deserted area here. The destruction was carried out by the border troops. The trustees were given a rifle and a shovel. When such a border guard soldier met in a deserted place (on the road, in a field, in a forest) a lonely Belarusian or Belarusian, or a child, he would shoot a person, immediately dig a hole with a shovel and fill up the corpse. That was the instruction. The people in the villages were not so afraid of the "man with the gun" as they were the soldier with the shovel. (These facts were published in the Belarusian press in the early 90s.) In the 30s, 95-99 percent (almost completely) was destroyed (exiled and shot) the Belarusian communist-party and Soviet administration. Even the directorate and business leaders were destroyed. Russians from Russia were sent to the posts of murdered administrators and communist leaders-Belarusians. Russians (the so-called "promoted") came to Belarus, occupied vacated positions, received benefits, property, apartments, and the first thing they did was to close Belarusian schools, translate them into Russian so that their children could study without burdening themselves with studying , as they said, “unnecessary” Belarusian language. Thus, the invaders created a "Russian-speaking population" in Belarus. Ethnocide, linguacide, mnemacid and genocide were carried out by the Bolsheviks at the same time. The extermination of Belarusians by the Russian NKVD continued during the German augmentation as well. In June 1941, in the first days of the war, the communists shot thousands of prisoners in prisons and in stages. Only in the Brest Fortress, where there was a terrible NKVD prison, they did not have time to liquidate all those arrested, some of them fled. Meanwhile, a large group of NKVD overseers and functionaries were blocked in the fortress by the Germans. They sat there for about a month until they died out. About 20 years after the war, the communists came up with a legend about the "heroic defense" of the Brest Fortress. Attention is drawn to the fact that the broad Soviet partisan movement was organized only in Belarus and partially on the ethnic Belarusian lands that were part of Russia (Smolensk region, Bryansk region). There was no partisan movement in occupied Russia. Why? Because the plan for the destruction of the Belarusian nation continued to operate. Moscow, using the organs of the NKVD, dragged the masses of the Belarusian civilian population into the war against the Germans, and thereby exposed the Belarusians to the German attack. The necessary work of the struggle proceeded from an insidious plan and was carried out by vile methods. (Stalin wanted to get a double benefit.) Enkavadists specifically killed a German near a Belarusian village or made another provocation in order to cause a punitive operation of the Nazis (who usually burned the whole village, most often together with people). Thus, by the way, as a result of a special provocation of the Soviet partisans, the famous Khatyn was also burned, which the communists later advertised to the whole world in the 70s as a typical victim of fascist atrocities. As a result of this communist-fascist joint "work", more than 9 thousand villages were burned in Belarus. Moscow did not trust the Belarusians. Therefore, by the end of the war, as a result of a special operation of the NKVD, many Belarusian commanders were sent to death, removed from command, killed and repressed. Their places were taken by Russians sent from Muscovy and loyal NKVADists. In the summer of 1944, when the "Red Army" occupied Belarus, the Russians mobilized into the army on Belarusian territory. Tens of thousands of young Belarusian men, almost without preparation, were thrown into the front line of the front. Russian commanders raised them into unnecessary attacks under the fire of German machine guns, without even giving weapons in hand, or with rifles, but no cartridges. They died in thousands, like grass under a scythe. And those that fled back, fell under the bullets of the NKVD" en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kurapaty www.radabnr.org/en/kurapaty-the-road-of-death/

@@el_Litwin Good luck reading what European atlases say under LITHVANICA: i.imgur.com/PRNVEW0.jpg

ludzie myślą że pierogi ruskie są z rosji XD

@@el_Litwin long live bielarus, the true heir of grand duchy of lithuania. Love from poland

Vienu metu kada Lietuva buvo iki Juodosios jūros, tada buvo Žemaitijos kunigaikštystė išsiplėtusi beveik iki Vilniaus. Paprasčiausiai visos LDK provicijos išsiplėtė jos didybės metu apie maždaug 1410-1550 metus. Dėl to autorius ir daugybė baltarusių teigia, kad Samogitia = Dabartinė Lietuva.

@@lithuanianwarrior1081 Late response, but why is Baltic Lithuania and Ruthenia considered one identity on the map?

Zhemaitiya and Aukstaitiya are regions of the modern Republic of Lithuania, or rather, Zhemaitiya and Aukstaitiya were called Lithuania at the end of the 19th century, in historical and Ethnic Lithuania was located in the central and Western part of Belarus

Это регион современной , а к исторической Литве Жемайтия, Аукштайтия и Судавия отношения не имеют, они были автономией Литвы. Историческая и Этническая Литва находилась в центральной и Западной части Беларуси, где и обрадовалась ВКЛ. Летописная Литва находилась между реками Неман, Вилия и Березино

@Emmet Paliy Для тупого Ивана из России. Всю территорию Беларуси населяли Балты,и с приходом Славян они никуда не делись, в а остались на своём вместе, после крещения приняли церковнославянский язык. А центральные и западные территории современной Беларуси были всегда за бвлтами, славян там было мало. Более того Этническая, Летописная и изначальная Литва находилась в центральной и Западной части современной Беларуси, и тут жило племя Литва, которое предок Беларусов, современные Литовцы тогда были Жемайтами и Аукштайтами а не Литвой, потому что Литва была только в центральной и Западной части современной Беларуси, и в Вильно, который тоже беларуский, после того как Сталин подарил его современной Литве, он стал Вильнюсом. ВКЛ образовалась на территории Беларуси. Для тупых объясняю, Русь на территории современной Беларуси были только восточные и южные территории, а Центральные, западные и серверные были Этнической Литвой. А немцы ходили на Литву в Гродно и на Новогрудок, ну и на Жемайтию которая и есть современная Литва

1) Lithuania was not a country in 1009. It was just a baltic tribe. Lithuania become a country only in the middle of 13 century as a union of lithuanian tribe and Novogrudok city (under the rule of Mindovg). It was a union of the most rich city and the best warrior in the region. 2) Initially lithuania was located at Vilnia (Vilnius) region (modern Lietuva) and Grodno region (modern Belarus). But later all western part of modern Belarus was called as Lithuania. Ruthenian part of Belarus is only eastern part (Polotsk, Vitebsk) (15-16 centuries). By the 18 century all territory of Belarus was called as Lithuania. Ruthenians are mostly ukrainians 3) Vilnia (Vilnius) was not founded by Gedimin. It's only a myth about creation of Vilnia by Gedimin. The city existed before Gedimin (archeology rules :-) ))

@@alanparker2918 I replay, though it is nothing to discuss, the only ones who can believe this nonsense are the ones who want to be that true. I mean, some Belarusians may want to be Lithuanians, but they still always will have only Ruthenian ancestry. This myth that Belarus is Lithuanian is not even so long created, in the 19-20th century, some Belarusian historian wrote that, and it became the only written source of how Belarusians try to prove this... It is enough ancient writings, and those are made not even by ancestors, Lithuanians, themselves, but by nations that interacted with it - the Holy Roman Empire, Teutonic Order, and Vikings saga, also even Lithuanians were Pagan nation - they still make in many of Europe's monarchy royal trees. Those ancient writings clearly describe Lithuania. And note again, - Lithuania was way before the Grand Duchy of Lithuanian appearance. Lithuanians were always - Baltic and Ruthenian were always - Slavic. And this will not change even if you really want this. As well, - no other European historians, except some Belarusians (who want to be this true), believe this nonsense because everyone believes in real prof and ancient writings and not that some 9-20th century Balussian historian made up.

@@Tautas1123 Nice try, but - no. 1) Part of lithuanian tribes were slavianized. I hope you know that official documents of GDL was not even translated to your language because people (including balts) knew ruthenian language. So actually they became ancestors of belarusians, poles (now they live in Vilnia region) and modern lithuanians. Even more: all territory of Belarus was populated by balts. Slavic tribes went to the territory of Belarus only at 5-7 centuries. Belarusian are mix of balts and slavs from the very beginning (even without influence of lithuanian tribes). That's why about 80% of hydronyms in Belarus have baltic roots. 2) Second myth is that lithuanians were pagans and slavs were only orthodox. Even in 14 century a big part of slavs were pagans. 3) Third myth is that other historians supports your version. In real life they just don't care about it. It's just a dispute between you and us. BTW ukrainian historians support belarusian version. Looks like you even don't understand the difference between lithuanian tribes (which are balts for 100%) and Lithuania as a country (GDL) which is mainly slavic country. GDL had slavic governmental institutions (laws for example), official language, even coat of arms was called with a slavic word "Pogonia" (name Vytys was invented only in 19 century). Even name of the country was slavic "Litva" and not "Lietuva" - just google photos of GDL coins - they contains name of country "LITVA". In general GDL had only 2 baltic features: name and dynasty. The rest is slavic. PS: stop liking your own comments - it looks like sucking your own balls ))

Which Ukrainian historians support this Belarusian version? As far as I am aware the Baltic origin of the Lithuanian state is the mainstream accepted version.

​1. Belarus was not a thing in 1009 and your just jelus

belarussian culture (without russification) has more in common with culture of early modenr period Grand duchy of lithuania lol

@@michamarkiewicz1642 All Belarussian cities are built by pagan lithuanians

Няхай жыве Беларусь!

I beg to differ. In my personal case, it would only be polite, given how that's literally my name.

Wich is wrong, Polotsk did not fight the crusaders with Lithuania, the Lithuanian dukes did not speak slavic and 100% not veryone spoke slavic so you basecly got tought wromg history by a lieing litvinist ( belarusian )🫠

@@Lietuva.Liks.Laisva I know that Lithuania was ally of Polotsk and that Polotsk fought with crussaders. Ok maybe dukes didn't spoke slavic but I am absolutely sure that many people spoke slavic bc almost all territory of GDL were slavic dutchies

The theory of the heredity of Belarusians to the history of the Principality was not built from scratch. The pagans did not conquer the Belarusian territories. All of them were annexed peacefully.

@@romaanatsko4788 Technically before the liberating Ruthenia they actually raided and pillaged most of the south

@@TomTly I don’t know. But I know for sure that there were raids on the Principality of Polotsk. Mindovg and his followers annexed Russia without blood

@@romaanatsko4788 So why there are so many Catholic churches in Western Belarus? Who forced you to build them?

@@fidenemini111 I don’t remember what I wrote there. And the Poles cost them. Did they forget about Polonization? Do not forget that churches were also built during the Polish Republic. There were also many settled Poles.

You forgot to mention WHY the slavic language expanded. It spread from the Byzantine empire where slavic written language was invented. It was cheaper to hire slavic clerical language to write documents rather than Latin (which was simply more expensive and more difficult to find people being able to write Latin).

No - Samogitia and Lithuania (including for the purpose of 15-17 cent maps) are clearly two different things. Look even at the maps brought by Lithuania Propria. Definitely no - "colors of Rus" have nothing to do with directions. It's a long-debunked myth. Colors appeared in vastly different times and mostly on Western European maps. No - everything Baltic does not = modern Lithuanian. A huge Baltic legacy is in everything Belarusian. From West to East. Yes - there is factual documented evidence that Old Lithuanian dukes spoke Slavic themselves (which btw makes them Slavs regardless of their origin). And we only assume they spoke some Baltic tongue, too. For all we know, the original Old Lithuania was pagan, spoke Slavic, used Baltic, Germanic, Slavic names, and its territory was somewhat equally split between modern Belarus and modern Lithuania.

​@@Woloh Stop spreading your bs. Samogitia is different. It is like Scotland and Lithuania proper is like Britan and joined rus lands where rus lived is just part of empire like British empire. Speaking about colors. Baltic means White and White means west. Black means North and Red mean South and it literally corresponds to rus inhabited lands. It is not disproven. No matter how many times you try to on my comments. Facts are facts. Speaking about languages. Dukes specifically were Lithuanians. They were from Lithuanian tribes. Ofc dukes knew multiple languages. They ruled Slavs. Also, there are written sources proving that dukes spoke the baltic languages in between each other, without even talking about passed names. You only assume that they spoke Slavic and that is incorrect. Your argument that their names were from different origins also incorrect. All their names were from the Baltic origin. Talking about Lithuania. Yes, Lithuania was pagan. Meanwhile, rus lands weren't. Also its kind of funny that Slavs have their main god Perun. It is a baltic god Perkunas(thunder) and it is made of 2 baltic words via and body. Meaning that striking lightning goes across the body. And you have no clue what it means. For all we know, original Lithuania proper was a pagan, spoke Baltic, extended up to half of modern Belarus was inhabited by baltic people, and were ruled by baltic dukes.

@@BitWise501 Mneh... Have you seen the maps? Minsk is more Lithuania than Samogitia. I'm sorry your national ego is hurt by facts.

​@@Woloh What do you mean? Samogitia is just part of Lithuania. Minsk has nothing to do with that at all.

Minsk isn't even in proper Lithuania. www.litviny.net/uploads/2/5/4/5/25455257/zemelapis1705.jpg

There was no such a state "Grand Duchy of Lithuania, Rus, and Samogitia" - it is just a fake term invented by east Slavic nationalists living in the alternate world and creating fake stories. The name of the state was always the The Grand Duchy of Lithuania.

Be careful. Everything about Lithuania in this video is pure pseudo-science, created by Belorussians to justify their lack of national history. In reality Lithuania originated in the eastern part of Lithuania, while Samogitians were just one of Baltic tribes who maintained independence and did not unite with other Baltic tribes until very late. They still have very strong language differences and not all Lithuanians understand what they say.

Many of the historical maps shown were forgeries, false de jure claims. It's hard to know for sure, so much deception and rewriting of history and borders during USSR's reign.

There is official mainstream approved history and it does not follow this pseudo-history Belarussian bullshit :)

It always seems to me that belarusian and lithuanian hoistory is the most arguable historical thing

Litvin is a slavic word for lithuanian or lietuvis

There was never any other ethnicity with the name “ Litwin” other than Lithuanians themselves . Like with other nations , Lithuanians are called differently in different languages. For example word “Litwin” is Polish for Lithuanians.

Secondly, there was no such a state "Grand Duchy of Lithuania, Rus, and Samogitia" - it is just a fake term invented by east Slavic nationalists living in the alternate world and creating fake stories. The name of the state was always the The Grand Duchy of Lithuania.

@@Habibas777 No, litvin is a synonym for Belarus

@@Habibas777 Litovets is

I see a lot of Aukstatians @sses on fire. the fact is that GDL was a rusin (rus) state , language , form of governance, laws, titles, etc. Aukstatians elements in the state stricture are impossible to find. Aukstatian forest language has never been used , you show in your schools books printed in Prussia, which was always independent country

@NoZo-S サンダーデン edit: old - Belarusian language, Blats didn´t have form of governance, laws, titles, thats why you renamed Pohonia in 20c to Vitiazias (?) LOL, guys Prussian Blats in 19c made up your version of history , 50 000 Prussian balts who never have been part of GDL )))

@NoZo-S サンダーデン who gave you our Vilnia ? not Koba?

@NoZo-S サンダーデン your forest sect never had Vilnia, show on the map´s GDL name "vilnius " , once again GDL was a rusian (Belarusian) state like it or not, get over it , learn Official GDL state language

@@el_Litwin And what does Vilnia means in Belorussian? Give me please the link to a reliable analysis of etymology done by a professional and recognized linguist.

The idea of the "Scribes Conspiracy" who changed all names of their masters - Lithuanian Grand Dukes - is a very weak explanation and long debunked by historians. Btw, chronicles state that Olgierd knew a whole range of languages. It is reasonable to expect he knew how to write at least one of them. And at the very minimum, he understood how his scribe wrote his own name. The inconvenient truth is that Olgierd spoke Slavic as his native tongue. And was very likely named after his mother Olga (Olger - the little one from Olga). The encyclopedia by Starchevski suggests that the Smolensk Duchess Olga was the second wife of Giedymin after Evna (Eva) of Polotsk.

@@Woloh Just a lie. He said himself all Russia should belong to Lithuanians, he had nothing to do with Rusins. His name was Lithuanian , his religion was Lithuanian. He gave his sons Lithuanian names. Omnis russia ad litwinos deberet simpliciter pertinere.

@@1MuchButteR1 "He gave his sons Lithuanian names" Lol, fun fact - did you know Olgierd named his son Andrei even though he wasn't even Christianised? A Christian name without baptism! Or maybe you are referring to his other sons Vladimir and Dmitri? Yup, very Baltic names, indeed. Btw, those were Olgierd's oldest sons. I.e. those sons who he named first. He also had Jogaila, Skirgaila, and Svidrigaila. This should give you a taste of how everything was mixed up. Baltic, Slavic, Christian, Pagan - and all in one family.

@@Woloh He already gave you a direct message. All Russia should belong to Lithuanians. Not even to the mixed Lithuanian State, but to the Lithuanian nation. Lithuania from sources is known to show among first nationalism in Europe. Belarusins are left over Rusins due to historical circumstances, nothing less nothing more.

@@1MuchButteR1 So, a Slavic speaking Olgierd, who's married to Slavic Mary of Vitebsk and then to Slavic Uliana of Tver, whose own mother is Slavic Evva of Polotsk (or Slavic Olga of Smolensk), whose first three sons are called Slavic names Andrei, Vladimir and Dmitri, whose own brother Lubart is chosen (!) by a Slavic Galicia-Volynia Duchy as its ruler - that very Olgierd says that all of Slavic Ruthenia must belong to Lithuania. And he says it not to anybody, but to the Holy Roman Emperor! And yet he doesn't say anything similar about Baltic Samogitia (whose status is challenged by the Teutons and you would think Olgierd should be mentioning it to the Emperor first). As a matter of fact, he and his decendants easily trade Samogitia out when they need a peace with the Teutonic Order. Doesn't it tell you that Lithuania and Ruthenia where much closer to each other than Lithuania and Samogitia?

I believe the video talks about real historical maps, not modern interpretations designed to create national myths. I don't think anybody made maps of Lithuania in the 12th century.

@@Woloh So what does it mean, because there were no maps there was no country in that place? There are plenty of written sources that prowes Lithuania was there. Lithuanian kingdom in 13th century was pretty much in the place of current Lithuania. Later Vytenis, Gediminas, Algirdas and Vytautas annexed lands of current Belarus and Ukraine. Our country has full right to use name of Lithuania, because it all started here while Belarus has right to use coat of arms sign of Grand Duchy of Lithuania.

​@@xwing8029 Unfortunately, we are trying to make strong statements here about things that have literally zero to none factual evidence. We know very very little about ancient Lithuania. No one knows anything about its measures and what kind of people lived in it before written sources appeared. What do we have: 1) We have archeology - remains of pottery and graves in areas that we traditionally associate with this or that culture. This is no precise science, its understanding continuously changes, and it says us close to nothing about which language they spoke, or which country (or rather tribe) they belong to in this area. We traditionally thought of Yotwingians as Balts, and of Radimichis as Slavs. Now we see that Yotwingians had a huge Viking influence (to the point that some now think they were Vikings at all), and Radimichis had Baltic-type graves (and this is almost in Ukraine/Russia during Kievan Rus). Bottom-line - today's maps are not facts, they are opinions, often little informed and influenced by politics and national fantoms. 2) The only thing we know about the localization of ancient Lithuania is that Annals of Quedlinburg mention Bruno of Querfurt who was killed on the border of Lithuania and Rus in the 11th cent. Where was this place - nobody knows, but somewhere between Brest and Pinsk in modern Belarus based on indirect evidence. It's a pretty Slavic-speaking region by then, btw. 3) So, we know that Samogitia and Lithuania are two different things on old maps. We know that ancient Samogitia is like 80% of modern Lithuania (based on those maps). We know that ancient Lithuania covered the Vilno region of modern Lithuania, but also a pretty major region in Western Belarus. At the very least, Novogorodok, Slonim, Grodno, and maybe all the way until Polesia. 4) The ONLY written source of the "Lithuanian language" in the 14th century turns out to be very much Slavic. It was when Keistut gave a blood oath / blessing to a Hungarian king during a sacrifice of a cow when they cut its throat. A Hungarian chronicler wrote down as he heard it from Keistut himself - "Rogachina roznenachy gosponany". And even though it's a Baltic ritual, linguists overwhelmingly agree that the saying was in Slavic (Old Belarusian) meaning "rogacina" - i.e. "cattle", "roznenahy" - i.e. "determined/showed", "gosponany" - "gospod z nami" - "God is with us". "The cattle showed the God is with us". So, the Old Lithuanian language turns out to be a very Slavic language. What does it all mean? For sure we can say only very few things. For sure we can say that Lithuania was a pagan country. For sure we can say that Lithuania was a Slavic speaking country. For sure we can say that Lithuania was somewhere between completely Baltic (Samogitia) and completely Slavic (Polotsk) lands, covering the Vilno region in modern Lithuania and Western Belarus. That's it. And this Lithuania definitely doesn't = modern Lithuania, nor it = modern Belarus. It was something in-between. But after Olgierd it's a completely different country, after the addition of all the Ruthenian lands. Let me remind you that Samogitia was not a part of this process and remained independent or semi-independent all the way until Vitovt.

​@@Woloh Werent ancient Belarus ancestors ortodox? It was written in Annals of Quedlinburg that Bruno of Querfurt was killed by pagans. Also there are other sources that Bruno of Querfurt was killed near Prussia so it pintpoints location even better. Samogitia is only a part (33% at most) of modern Lithuania (just google about duchy of Samogitia). Btw, region of Samogitia speaks a lot different from remaining part of current Lithuania, different dialect and different culture. Remaining part of Lithuania is NOT and have NEVER been part of dutchy of Samogitia (Biržai, Utena, Ukmergė, Traikai, Kaunas, Vilkaviškis, Klaipėda (Memel)). You should agree there are more significant towns and places in current Lithuania than in Belarus, you said it yourself that Ruthenian lands were added later. Because of that it is completely incorrect to use 16th or 17th century maps to prove that current Lithuania is not a Lithuania. At this point you need to use sources like letters or some ancient annals. You also need to keep in mind at those times territories and their walls tend to change constantly. There is quite a lot things that prove Lithuanian-Baltic ethnicity of nobles in Grand Duchy of Lithuania. I will mention only one of those, though it should be more than enough. Form of their names. It is totally Baltic, it is composed usually of two words meaning something. For instance, Mindaugas - Min ("minėti" - to mention, to talk about) + daug ("daugelis" - many) = Mindaugas (famous, mentioned by many people). And there are much more facts that prove Grand Duchy to have been ruled by Lithuanians (ancestors of modern Lithuanians). However, I do not deny that Belarussians had a huge impact to Grand Duchy of Lithuania. This kind of history interpretation might be justifiable. Belarussian culture needs a myth to keep its own culture which is now endangered. Lithuanians had their own myth long time ago about their roman origins. This myth helped Lithuanian culture to survive but now it is well known to be false. Hopefully Belarus culture also survives and then we can talk about our common history without those crazy ideas that are now spread across Belarus

I can tell u 1 quastion: Why Vilnus named Vilnus?

Well you've just lisend to a howl lot of propaganda

I see a lot of Aukstatians @sses on fire. the fact is that GDL was a rusin (rus) state , language , form of governance, laws, titles, etc. Aukstatians elements in the state stricture are impossible to find. Aukstatian forest language has never been used , you show in your schools books printed in Prussia, which was always independent country

Forest troll, if you are "Grand" why you can not build a Nuclear Power Plant ? en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Astravets_Nuclear_Power_Plant you are 100% right with your trolling , we will force you to take a proper name , for new you are using ours

How do you know?

@@MinskGuide from history books

Well, the first one did not capture the land of Belarus. Almost all Belarusian principalities were annexed either voluntarily, as Polotsk did in 1307, or by dynastic marriage, as Vitebsk did in 1320. Only two principalities were captured by military means. Residents of Novogrudok invited Mindovg to reign.

Baltic Lithuanians are small tribes. They were not even called Lithuanians until 20th century. Every modern person from Lithuania even now know what tribe the belong to.

@@got2bgreat1 Baltic tribes - en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_ancient_Baltic_peoples_and_tribes#/media/File%3ABaltic_Tribes_c_1200.svg

It's not true. East slavic population was half pagan even in 14 century.

@@alanparker2918 And no historical sources to back all this fantasy. How pity.

@@fidenemini111 Oh really ? )) You can start from reading story of saints Anthony, John, and Eustathius. Initially these guys were pagans. Their pagan names were Кумец, Круглец, Нежыла. Slavic names as you can see. Later these guys become christians (and changed their names to christian ones). These guys were killed by Algerd. It's 14 century. Now they are saints of city Vilnia )) You even don't know history of "your" capital )) LOL

@@alanparker2918 You are funny.

@@fidenemini111 no more arguments ?

Lithuanians also call Minsk Minskas, they live on their own planet)

@@wawa-zm5wl It's literally the same word? What is your point?

@@wawa-zm5wl The same way as Poles who call Italy Włochy and literally for each Lithuanian Town have their own Polish name.

@@wawa-zm5wl We don't live on our own planet, our language is just way harder than yours and our words have the End parts which are either feminine or masculine

@@wawa-zm5wl Lithuanian grammar requires for that kind of ending.

Good luck reading what European atlases say under LITHVANICA: i.imgur.com/PRNVEW0.jpg

I hope you understand that the grand duchy of lithuania was Lithuania

​@@Lietuva.Liks.LaisvaI hope you understand that it was Belarus and Luthuania

True, back then Lithuanians are modern Belarusians, so GDL was genuinely a Belarusian state

@@PhilipDaineka Vytautas himself referred to lithuanians and Samogitians as a same people. So in terms of citizenship, yes, Ruthenians were Lithuanians, but not Ethnic Lithuanians.

@@PhilipDaineka it was Lithuanian controled state not Belarusian (sorry for your hopes being lost.)

@@eveningabused5123 at start capital of GDL was Novogrudok, city in Belarus, but then it was moved in modern Vilnus. And modern belarusians was real lithuanians

@@benkenobi3703 ever heard of a city named Kernavė? That was the original capital of the GDL before Vilnius

White Rus originated from Kievan Rus. And modern Russia ISN'T Kievan Rus.

@@user-zr1df8ke9p The term "Kievan Rus" was created by Russian Imperial historians in 19th century, surprise-surprise they don't teach that in the Ukraine today. There are no documents signed as "Kievan Rus", but Russian chronicles do talk about "Rus" or "Russian land" and "Russian princes". Modern Russia has everything to do with ancient Rus. Russia has the first capital of Staraya Ladoga and the second capital of Novgorod. I can open some old Russian chronicles today and read them without too much of training myself.

Vatnik detected

It cannot be connected because Rus and Russia is not the same thing. Russia is a derivative of Rus and Belarus, a derivative not of Russia, but of Rus

Thanks from Belarus!

God bless to you too

Thank you!

Please, open any of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania's statutes. I bet you won't understand what it says just because it's written with old belarusian (actual old lithuanian) language) That says a lot about which culture dominated in medieval Lithuania, isn't it?

@@kiimakikatterhot3391 what ??? Lithuanian kingdom wasn’t just Lithuania it was Belarus parts of poland Ukraine Latvian Estonian Moldova crimea you can find numerous of different written in different languages within Lithuanian kingdom 🤦‍♂️ and yes it is in Slavic language I’m not arguing about it. If you want to understand how our king Mindaugas was ruling kingdom you need to read more about him and his ruling he was paigan within Lithuanian kingdom (actual Lithuania) but taking Slavic religion within other lands like Belarus and jesuit within other neighbours like Poland

@@kiimakikatterhot3391 and one more thing we have all grand duchy statutes written in Lithuanian and you are not Belarus you are Gudija what means in Lithuanian (the others) referred as other part of Lithuanian kingdom Who doesn’t speak Lithuanian

oh, I forgot!! Maikng a conclusion from whot I've written you're a slav. Just take away "-ius" finale from your surname)

This is not so. After all, the Teutons attacked the Polotsk land. Despite the fact that they had been Christians for 300 years. Just remember that the crusaders attacked Grodno and Novogrudok. Although there were about 6 churches in Grodno. And there are more in Novogrudok

😂😂😂you learned nothing now you literaly thinck that belarus was Lithuania and that LDK was belarus💀

@@Lietuva.Liks.Laisva I wonder what's more convincing, arguments and maps with their sources that I can and have independently verified, or a random comment in a mocking tone with zero substance or arguments of any kind...

@@franciscoflamenco go studdy history and youll find out

@@Lietuva.Liks.Laisva How about you stop wasting my time and study it yourself, along with some other useful skills like reading comprehension and rhetoric?

@@franciscoflamenco its not my problem your in idiot, i learn history and i do read and i do study it un like you

Lithuania Propria you wanted to say.

Denying what?

"Mindaugas" - can I ask you a question? Why do you guys keep making up fake names to historical figures? For example, imagine you were born to the Gashtold noble family, and your mom and dad named you Jan. And sure, different nations give different spellings to your name. In Poland they will write you as Jan Gasztołd. In Cyrillic languages they will write you Ян Гаштольд. But in all of them you will still sound relatively close to how you originally were called - JAN GASHTOLD. And then people come to Wikipedia and discover that your name was Jonas Goštautas, because new Lithuanians renamed and reclaimed you ....... Facepalm. Can you imagine you told that guy that 5 centuries later he would become Jonas and Goshtautas??? He would probably execute you on a spot.

@@Woloh Really? So then please explain why every source on the internet , every documentary , every school book , every single person , historical documents ETC and ETC. Use MINDAUGAS as the name , can you become smart and understand that Lukashenko propaganda isn't real life ? Thanks man , cya soon in smartland.

@@matushka__ What lukashenka propaganda? He likes to get of our language and makes us use Russian. Surely he would not make us use Russian. If he did want to "steal" history.

@@ianyacuk6883 Im litterally too tired and annoyed to reply , check the other comments I posted , if not , please watch this video ( Note only watch it if you didnt read my comments) kzfaq.info/get/bejne/i6pzl6qjr6izfmQ.html

@@matushka__ I have read your comments and saw the video. But Lukashenka wouldn't really care as he's destroying the culture. That's just the correction.

Also Ukraine was called Russia Nigra (Black) and Russia Rubra (Red)

Of the Grand Duchy or today's Lithuania? Because we believe it's not completely the same. The Charter of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania was in old Belarusian.

@@MinskGuide The Grand Duchy

@@MinskGuide How many people were literate those times? Even not everyone of noble descend could read and write then. So how do you know what language they spoke between themselves? Well indirect source could be chronicles of the given period, and (surprise surprise) place names and names of rivers and lakes.

@@MinskGuide Good luck reading what European atlases say under LITHVANICA: i.imgur.com/PRNVEW0.jpg

Old Belarusian

This is wrong

BELA-RUS White - белы (Belyy)

Wtf, snow is yellow! That's why you shouldn't eat it.

Although our leaders were Baltic. Lithuania started out in Navahurak. Mendog or Mindaugas was expelled from the Baltic region because of his failed mercenary jobs. He fled to Navahrudak and got elected King. He then conquered the Baltic tribe Litva. Litva was originally Blatic and not Slavic word. But once conquered, Mendog named his duchy Litva. Why? many nations have done that. For example Prussia was originally Baltic but was germanized but still kept the name Prussia.

In all fairness. Both Belarusians and Lithuanians created the state.

I think you misunderstood something. The video talks about ACTUAL old maps, made by ACTUAL people who lived in 15th-16th century, based on ACTUAL information they had at that moment. Not to mix with modern "historical" maps where everyone draws whatever they like based on political or national preferences. Those old maps clearly show a distinct Samogitia. And if none of them says a word about Aukstaitija that means either those cartographers never heard about it, or didn't consider it an important enough information to get included on a map. Unlike other sub-regions of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania, like the Slutsk Duchy, or the Mogilev District. Sorry.

@@Woloh as much as you want to steal history and take the glory from us , just accept the fact that you are a russianized polish Lithuanian and Ukrainian mix of people

​@@matushka__ Look, I'm happy to accept anything you like, but you have to give me facts and figures, not just your ethnic ambitions. There are such sciences as Archeology and History, there are archives of ancient documents and chronicles, and they paint a different picture. Whether you like it or not, we clearly know that ancient Lithuanians were pretty different from modern Lithuanians. At the very least, we know that they spoke and wrote a Slavic language and they were not Christians, used pagan names. (Which btw immediately makes them Slavs because "Slavic" is a linguistic concept, not an ethnic one). You are saying it was their second language - maybe, but there is zero evidence for that so far. Pottery and shapes of graves tell you nothing about other languages. But this doesn't even matter. We know that their key settlements - the most of which are in modern Belarus, sorry - were a peaceful mix of cultures. Including a huge footprint of Scandinavian cultures among the neighboring "Baltic" Yotvingians, for example. We are trying to divide them based on Baltic / Slavic duopoly with an idea to shoehorn them into one of the modern states. Well, good luck with that. Then you are be building your ethnic identity on a very shaky foundation which can change overnight with every new document discovered or another layer of an old settlement unearthed.

Man, it's always a pleasure to find a lithuanian who isn't salty and angry on us because of how history played out. Much love, don't forget the formula: Belarus+Lithuania=Great Duchy

@UCKD4uJDwkZI8GpbckxXWA_Q Many lithuanians are brainwashed by many of our historians and think that nationalist minded belarusians are secretely wanting to take Vilnius or are afraid that Belarus would "steal" all the legacy of the Grand Dutchy of Lithuania for their country. I find it the thinking of those brainwashed lithuanians people extremely stupid. First of all, we have had a shared state and the heritage of the Grand Dutchy belongs to both lithuanians and belarusians. Belarus is the only neighbouring country lithuanians never had a conflict with. In fact we even had border skirmishes with the latvians in 1919, but never any fight with the belarusians :)

Lithuania was not Belarussian Or Lithuanian, it was a union of both

@@magnus_ducatus9684 East Slavic lithuanian = modern belarusian. Baltic lithuanian = modern (lithuanian).

@@lithuanianwarrior1081 I still believe that both have rights to take pride for it

Latgals no any connection with Litwa !

@@Nenarodec Latgalians were actually puppets of Polotsk for a period of time.

​@@Nenarodec they have connection. Baltic culture, baltic language.

If Belarus becomes free, I hope we will be recognised as one of the Baltic states. We were in GDL together with baltic peoples for 545 years.

@@Maxz85 That is nice to hear. Remember that white ruthenians are also gebetically part baltic like the english are part celtic or the yugoslavs part illyric. The merging of slavs and balts in the modern territory of belarus was peaceful.

@@lithuanianwarrior1081 Yep, and baltic tribes lived on our land before slavs came here.

Yeah but they speak slavic....

Durneli,negi nemataikadčia visiškas litvinistis kliedesys,kai belarusai eilinì kartá bando pavogt mūsu istorijá? Tegu jie būna LDK dalimi bet nebando primetinėt kad jie yra tikrieji baltai ir LDK kūrėjai

Belarusians called themselves lithuanians ("litviny") in written since 16th century, for instance Francisk Skaryna. And he never called himslef ukrainian. If you mean he identified as "rusin" or ruthenian, he meant his faith. In the belarusian language "rusin" means orthodox christian and "polak" means catholic.

@@Name-og4th lil bro, I’m very well aware of the difference between litvins and litovtsi and the fact that for a specific period of time Rusyn meant orthodox living in “Lithuania” and “Poland” that doesn’t change the fact that in 18th century there were depictions of “Belarusyns” titled Lithuanian Ukrainians, this is because as you well understand foreigners didn’t really understand the difference between litvins and litovtsi thus why they wrote Lithuanian Ukrainian in reference to litvins…. and side note, during the 18th century Rusyns no longer meant orthodox inhabitant of Lithuania or Poland, it was earlier.

žamoitis uspakoitis. Литва находится на территории Беларуси, в Новогрудке создали Великое княжество. Единственная часть Литвы, которую отдал Сталин вам, жамойтам, город Вильня. Этим вы подкрепили свои сказки будто вы не жамойты, а литвины. Нашему гербу Погоня 700 лет. Вы его украли в 19 веке и придумали название "Витис". Ваш настоящий герб - Медведь. При создании вашего государства шли споры назваться ли Жамойтией, но решили что беларусам конец, поэтому выгоднее украсть нашу историю и дурить весь мир.

@@Name-og4th "в Новогрудке создали Великое княжество"- Как, кто и когда создал в Новогрудке ВКЛ? Расскажи:)

@@druginys В Новогрудрке в 1253 году Миндовг от имени папы римского был коронован королём Литвы.

@@Name-og4th Из каких источников вы щерпаете сию чепуху? и вообще, укажи мне какой либо источник 13,14 ну или хотя бы 15 веков, где намекается что Миндауг хотя бы мимо Новогрудка проезжал?

Hands down. I’d love to hear more. I appreciate both the Grand Duchies of Moscow and Lithuania for the history of Belarus, as without both I would not be here. It is the USSR which turned everything into mess and whose memory should be spat upon and all those who try to uphold it as our people’s epitome when it was our people’s lowest point.

Да он даже по-белорусски не бум-бум. В названиях городов это слышно.

Yes and no. Yes, those forms have their own meanings (different, Kiestut for example means agile). No, because these names. have not slavic but germanic roots (mostly connected with Gothic language).

Literally no one cares.

@@stannumowl 🤣🤣🤣

Official GDL language was oldbelarusian cry zhmudin

Lithuanian became angry

I think its more like4ussia, becouse polish govermant is useless human garbage but its not as bad as in russia i think as a polish person.

Nether, It’s complicated. Belarus was subjected to heaviest Russification of all territories of former Russian Empire. Also, of all former USSR Republics, Belarusian culture was by far the most prosecuted during Stalinist terror. To make matters worse, Lukashenka’s dictatorial strategy was to Russify Belarus even further. Today Belarus is it’s own unique land, with artificially infused Russian culture (however, with a Belarusian twist). All of that is currently changing, thanks to Belarusian cultural awakening.

@@AK-dp5sx but belarus existed only after fall of ZSRR, or im not educeted enough.

@@janwitkowski3322 again, complicated. This video did an exceptional job of explaining Belarusian history, and it’s legacy of GDL. As far as modern Belarus, under the name given to it by the Russians? It had a brief stint in early 20 century. The Belarus we know today? Yes, 1991. As far as “existing”? Belarusian language, people, culture, inhabited this land centuries, upon centuries, upon centuries.

*Algirdas. Its a lithuanian name

It is very easy to prove that this is a lie. Point us to any single battle, any single captured city from that conquest, any evidence, please!? You cannot. Because there was none. Forget chronicles, even archaeologists have nothing. The best you can do is the capture of Smolensk by Vitovt. First, it's not even Belarus today. And second, two other Smolensk lands (Orsha and Mstislavl) joined the GDL peacefully and willingly and stayed loyal to it throughout centuries. Same as all other cities - from Polotsk to Pinsk. (While Samogitia, by the way, had to be pacified with force).

@@Woloh okay bud...

Living in shit with no perspectives for a better life. Wait, let's invent the glorious past by this we will change our future. Very "smart" move - fake it until you make it.

@@Woloh can you name any battles where Slavs ( Belarusians ) conquered Samogitians ? Yes , there is very easy to disprove claim of Belarusians that they are , somehow Lithuanian . No sources prior to the incorporation of their land to Lithuanian state called them by the name . It was just part of the land, known as Rus’s .

@@birchheights6542 That is not the claim of Belarusians. The claim of Belarusians is that they come from a mix of three different duchies. 1. The Duchy of Polotsk - one of the ancient Viking-Slavic entities that competed with Kiev; 2. The Duchy of Turov - this was an integral part of the Kievan Rus; 3. The Duchy of Lithuania - a Slavic-speaking Pagan-dominated mix of Slavs and Balts. The claim of the Belarusians is that this third duchy - Lithuania - was culturally, linguistically, and politically much closer to Polotsk than to Samogitia. The key difference was religion, not language. The problem of modern new-Lithuanians is that they associate Belarusians only with Polotsk. And this is simply not the case. Balts gave rise to various countries. Including those that became not really Baltic-speaking. Rus and Litwa are different things. But both of them make up modern Belarus. And another part of Litwa and Samogitia make up modern new-Lithuania.

somogitia land is much much smaller than it is shown.

Also Olgerd is not changed it is Algirdas the leader was Lithuanian. god you need to check more about Lithuania you have so many mistakes...... (also it was written in that way because Lithuanians didnt have there own langage so they used Ruthenian language)

Ruthenia is how catholic/latin authors referred to slavic lands of former Kievan Rus' empire. Orthodox slavic authors used the term Rus'

You have to be a little more specific than that. What exactly is fake there? Others might debate you, use sources, and references.

@@Woloh Everything from start to end.

@@fidenemini111 That means you have nothing. Just an empty talk. Sorry that facts hurt your nationalist feelings.

@@Woloh That means you are troll.

@@fidenemini111 That means you are uneducated

What about Black Rus? or Red Rus?

It is not the case. Colors were used for direction. Baltic means White and White means west. Black means North and Red means South. Also, we didn't use the word baltic for our tribes. It is a new thing. Tho Samogitia and Lithuania aren't Belarus.

I see a lot of Aukstatians @sses on fire. the fact is that GDL was a rusin (rus) state , language , form of governance, laws, titles, etc. Aukstatians elements in the state stricture are impossible to find. Aukstatian forest language has never been used , you show in your schools books printed in Prussia, which was always independent country

@@el_Litwin lol you are a funny comedian. What a complete lack of grasp on history.

@@oddoni do you understand once Luka out GDL (Bielarus´) 🏳️❤️🏳️ will take all what you (much smaller land) have stolen ?

And it's absolutely wrong. Know your place serf.

even you surname is lithuanian, not belarusian

Belarus was vasals of Lithuanian kingdom and that’s it, don't mix your fake Belarusian school theories with history

Its time to apologize, go on your knees you wretched.