1. We have added a Gift Upgrades feature that allows you to gift an account upgrade to another member, just in time for the holiday season. You can see the gift option when going to the Account Upgrades screen, or on any user profile screen.
    Dismiss Notice

new civilization: Lithuania

Discussion in 'Civ4 - New Civilizations' started by CivArmy s. 1994, Dec 29, 2005.

  1. Eskel

    Eskel Chieftain

    Mar 19, 2006
    Poznań, Poland
    About different claims...
    Polish often claim dominating, key role in Polish-Lithuanian Union (some nationalists even call it Poland, what is undoubtedly false), and claim some strongly polonized areas (e.g. Vilnius) as polish. Vilnius is or rather had been (I mean become and stopped to be) polish in many ways, but it doesn't change it never was only polish. I would say rather it was always and is lithuanian city before all. And our dominating role - it is only a beutiful (for us) myth, as we were just partners.

    Lithuanians often claim they conquered Belorus, while it seems they rather dominated it with diplomacy more than might, and couldnt rule it with military power only. If you want to know why, just check troops listing of Grunwald Battle - there were much more Rus then Lithuanians. Looks like these numbers counts in pro of Rus ... Despite that Lithuanians had the lead of GDL - and that is a fact that no one could defy. It wasnt slavic ruled country at all. But the fact as well is that you needed a legitimization of your rule, and you lacked a skilled administration apparatus - thats why conquered Rus became more and more important in GDL over time, not only because of Moscow threat alone.

    Belorussian tend to consider themselves as equal partners of Lithuanians in GDL - what is simply not true. But many Lithuanian's talking about Belorussian in terms of a conquered or occupied nation seems not fair thing. As time passed they were rather convinced, not forced to serve in GDL army. I think Lithuanians should be pride that they could create steady alliance with Rus nobleman, instead sinking in bloodthirsty tyranny. For me it is real sign that your rulers were much smarter and civilized than many historians describing Lithuanians as pagans and barbarians could admit. It is a proof that they had great political instinct - IMO greater than of many so called civilized western kings. I cant understand why you so much insist on military aspect of your domination over Belorussians in GDL (what is not clear thing because of demographics), while more important was wise politics.

    GDL didnt die suddenly, did it? IMO it has swiftly transformed into Commonwealth, what among other things reflected the increasing role of Rus people in it.

    Back to the subject of modding Civ4 - I think there are some interesting possibilities of creating different mods. Three mods can introduce separate polish, lithuanian and belorussian civs. One mod can introduce them all in one moment, so they can compete or cooperate in one game, basing on normal Civ rules. Flavour political fiction scenarios can include attitude modifiers. Historical scenarios can allow to play with member of preset permanent alliance made on basis of Commonwealth.

    Actually, I had written it more for fun, than seriously, but ...
    Well, I am quite impressed about National Geographic's Genographic Project lately. It can make few big surprises...And Poles are strongly mixed with all their neighbours, even with the Germans (especially eastern Germans are almost 'slavic' nation).
    Today's Lithuanians are descendants of peasntry mostly, but you can't say there weren't some illegal relationships. What about Polish immigrants who were assimilated? Moreover, many nobles of Lithuanian roots became eventually Polish, and mixed into our population. I know few Jagiello's (Jogaila's) or Sopyllo's personally, and there are the Mickiewiczes or Sapieha's still living in Poland. So we can speak different languages and have different culture or historical interpretations, but can be quite close relatives.

    Still I think we should lobby together to show Westerners - e.g. from Firaxis - that East Europe consists not of Russia only. And we, together with Belorussians, should come to some kind of consensus in subject of Commonwealth and Polish-Lithuanian Union. Just think where we all can stop our claims (listed at the top), so everybody can accept this. I think compromise needs we drop sth on the table, before we can take sth back.

    Regards (Pozdrawiam)
  2. Undeadas

    Undeadas Chieftain

    Jul 20, 2001
    Kaunas, Lithuania
    Well in a dominating role Polish very like suceeded (that's one of the reasons todays lithuanians don't like your commonwelf (zezczespolita or whatever it was called) like polish do :) (we like GDL times more) ).
    And that part about "strongly polonized Vilnius" - can't agree. Polish allways tried to put that in this way, but then it is said so - they speak about noblemans and some part of Vilnius citizens, while closing eyes for peasantry...
    I would agree that Vilnius district was polonized at about the rate of ~30% - but for any bigger number, I would like to see strong facts, not just words...

    (by the way - just 80 years ago fellow polish claimed all Lithuania as their internal part :crazyeye: )

    Well - that domination which you mean, was nothing else like "incorporating into the country". How's that different from occupation? In some cases that diplomation worked this way:
    "you accept me as a ruler, or i'll put another instead of you" - for example Vytautas has changed a lot of rebellious rulers...

    If you would look at those numbers (btw - I checked it - there are about 10 different historians, and about 20 different numbers :lol: ) one thing you will find:
    * There weren't any russian, belarusian or other slavic troops on the battlefield which would have come outside GDL.
    * All russ who there on the battlefield came from GDL territory, more than that - the longer that territory belonged to GDL - the more troops arrived.
    * The whole GDL was ruled by a bit different thing compared to other monarchies: every nobleman has had the duty to gather army if the high duke asked them. And if the nobleman (or just a simple region "duke") was unable to do so - he was changed to other... (nice thing?) So when Vytautas ordered to prepare for war - it wasn't something like - we wanna come, we don't wanna - we don't. Just all the mechanism worked fine... So GDL got a mechanism how to use conqured and incorporated regions for the kingdom... And the main thing - the decision wasn't made by a small duke, or by some belorusian noblemans congress. So the thing about troops don't give any suggestion about belarusina domination (it just shows very clearly about obiedence of their).

    (BTW: it loks like on the battlefield in the army of GDL there were from 33% to 60% lithuanians (some say it was only 1 rd of them some sources say there were more than hald of them), I checked why situation in 1528 army inventorisation is different - and gues who? GDL was loosing russian territory, and also some of their influence)

    actually one of the highest inheritance of high duke Vytautas - was a strong ruling mechanism (because after him all small dukes acknowledged a central - high duke as a ruler, just before Vytautas - some dukes called themselves allies (and sometimes acted even on their own foreign policy) - after Vytautas - such disobedencie vanished...).

    Actually if you would like to hear my opinion: Lithuanians would have never occupied/incorporated them into GDL, if Belarusians were united (at that time that region was called very differently on the timeline).

    That conviction was very strongly related to "how long you are in the GDL". think for your self - if your grandgrand something was obeying to some country - why should you do something differently? GDL rulers managed to incorporate them without any large scale opressions. But if you would like to look into the history - you would find small scale opresions agains noblemans (and noblemans are only a small part of any nation), for more tightness in more free-thinker regions - the new ruler was put into power from different those region nobleman family - so after 200 years (and some russ regions were rooled even more than 300 under GDL) - some could look back and say "oh - they put me and my family into power" (why should you rebell agains such thing?) many others could look back and say ("my grandma/granfa was nobleman from Lithuania - so I'm part of this country") - why such man should make rebelion?

    It wasn't an alliance - I allready showed that, if that would be alliance as you think - Belarusia would have flown into the Duthcy Moscow, that what happened to Ukraine (when GDL gave it's controll to you (polish) ).

    That's not only of military thing (which actually existed - all you have to read - it's Vytautas or Algirdas movements into russ territories), the thing is that russ regions weren't incorporated at alliance level (if we would look in short terms - then yes, but such short terms often ends with parting away from GDL). In GDL - it was a clear hierarchy who is who.

    If you would read GDL history of each of his rulers - you could find a lot of small alliances with regional russ families, but also - those alliances after some time went off... and there is one big difference - Vytautas, who made Lithuania (GDL) not that multinational (it allready was so) - but with strong central power. After Vytautas there wasn't any kind of alliances or family alliances - it was one centralized country (btw - while every lithuanina can say - Vytautas was the one that bought Lithuania from Baltic to Black sea - really he added not so much territory after Algirdas - instead of it - he made a unitarian state insted of some kinf of federation, and if you don't like work ocupation - so I can use word - incorporation).

    The last big map (known to me, and really - I don't know too much) showing Lithuania and Polish as two different countries - was about 100 years after union... But the power of "Grand Duke" (ahh.. I also call it high Duke) - died much sooner... And after union (30-50 years) - GDL was something without centralized power, only in rare exceptions some Grand Dukes of Lithuania were ruling GDL, not only their own territories...
    (BTW - as I understand polish see Commonwealth as something positive, but for Lithuanians - it's something there the country died... (in some aspects - yes it grew up - cities, culture... but by goting this - it lost its internal united power) )

    Well it's hard to introduce belorussians - because, they were divided russian tribes... (anyway - if they can do so - why not, just please - don;t put a lot of Lithuanian towns into that :lol: )

    So that's 4 different mods.

    Yes - but really it's all about small scale (exception - Vilnius district... and one in Poland - can't remmeber it's name - near Lithuanian border).

    You see - here we have 4 different civs (i would like to see it more like 3 (Polish, GDL, Commonwealth) ), it's simply too much for a real game. And for an indie approach - yes - there could be made a very nice scenario :)

    P.s. Acutally this our discusion may be the biggest approach to a Polish, Lithuanian, Blearusian history in about 50 years :) (because there was only one small discussion between different historians in the times of USSR )
  3. Litvin

    Litvin Chieftain

    Feb 15, 2006
    Belarus (Grand Duchy of Lithuania)
    I'm sorry for not typing same huge posts (kinda busy times in Belarus:rolleyes: ), but if anyone is interested in Belarus and Belarusian point of view on the History of Grand Duchy of Lithuania, please check this site:


    Thnax in advance for the time you spend to get some new info about Belarus:)
  4. LDeska

    LDeska LDeska

    Jan 22, 2003
    I'll cut most if it 'cause it's impossible to discuss with so huge posts...

    Oh boy, it is "Rzeczpospolita" and it is simply a polish version of 'Republic', which in time gained meaning of Polish Republic (there is also a word 'Republika' which is used to describe other republics than Polish). Currently we have Third Republic, so it is "III Rzeczpospolita Polska".

    Here you go - facts: (I've already put in in other thread) those are official data of Lithuanian Statistical Office: http://www.std.lt/en/pages/view/?id=1732
    Take a look at last rows: Vilnius county has over 26% of Poles _today_ - what do you think about numbers 60 years ago? I think that there was more than 2/3 of Poles then. Even today there are districts like 'Vilnius district municipality' - the last row in that table, where there is 63% of Poles _today_ or 'Salcininkai district municipality' - 80% of Poles, according to official, Lithuanian data. I hope that you will agree with those facts?

    About Grunwald:
    What do you mean??? There were almost only Slavs there! Do you forget that Poles are Slavs? Comparing to whole army there was not so many Lithuanians (together with Belarus and Ukraine the number was much bigger), but still - it was Polish Knighthood which was the core of the army, because it was heavy cavalry. Forces from Lithuania, Belarus, Ukraine and Tatars were light cavalry and infantry.

    I never understood that point of view - Lithuanian Duke married Polish Queen and became King of Poland, for hundreds years Lithuanian dynasty ruled our both countries, yet Lithuanians always complain that were ruled by Poles :) I simply doesn't understand it. About the way we think about Commonwealth you are right - we think of it as our Golden Age - Poland stretched from Baltic See to Black See, was really multiethnic (Poles, Jews, Lithuanians, Belarussians, Ukrainians, Russians, Germans) and multireligious (Catholics, Protestans, Jews, Orthodox) state. And we are proud that there was no burning of witches or killing of Jews in our country as it was in Western Europe (that's why so many Jews came to our country in years about 1000-1200). The only error that some Poles do is that they think 'Poland' instead of 'Commonwealth', but they are justified by two things: the most of citizens were Poles, the capitol was in Kraków, most of lands belonged to Korona (Polish part of Commonwealth), not to GDL, but as I wrote the King was Lithuanian.

    It would be really nice to have such mod :) ! Although I really look forward to see Poland in next version of civ or in an add-on...

    Best regards!
  5. LDeska

    LDeska LDeska

    Jan 22, 2003
    Are you in that square in centre of Minsk right now? We are watching you in tv and wish you all the best. There is few of you, but two years ago it would be impossible for me to even think that Belarussians will awake, yet you are awakening... Keep the spirit and you will win! Maybe not this time, but in one, two years I think that Lukaszenko will step down.
    There were many observers from Poland in Belarus - even some of them get arrested also many of the ZPB (Union of Poles in Belarus) activists were jailed for the time of elections. Militia didn't even respect immunity of MP (Member of Parliament), one of our MP was jailed for one night, because they were not letting militia to the office of opposition candidate - Milinkiewicz, where militia arrested the staff of office and conduct a search of this office.
    Sorry for off-topic, the the History (with great 'H') is right now written in Belarus.
    P.S. Sursum corda!
  6. Eskel

    Eskel Chieftain

    Mar 19, 2006
    Poznań, Poland
    You can say Polish dominated the Commonwealth. But I can see that nothing could be done without Lithuanians. It is sad that you dont feel as a part of this. It is your choice that you split from your own heritage.

    Well, I don't feel offended if you say e.g. "Warmia and Mazury (north-eastern part of Poland) wasn't Polish in XIV cnt.". They weren't, as they were inhabitated by some Baltic tribes and conquered by Teutonic Order. I would even say more - every single square meter of Polish territory wasn't Polish once upon a time. We have come to this country in VI-VII cnt. Earlier there were other people here. And what does it change? IMO anything.
    Vilnius was purely lithuanian, then become even more polish than lithuanian (thats why some Poles 80ty yrs ago claimed it), and now is lithuanian again. This war 80yrs ago wasn't surely right thing, because Vilnius never stopped to be lithuanian (even when lithuanian temporarily become minority). I think that both sides have had their reasons, and denying it is pointless.
    I cannot deny rights of Germans visiting Wroclaw, Szczecin or Gdansk, however I disapprove of their contemporary claims. As I said, Vilnius is lithuanian and should be lithuanian, nor I have any claims towards this city now, so why dont you agree that there were some moments in the past that number of Poles who came to the city was bigger then Lithuanians actually, and some important for Polish historical and cultural events happend just there?

    Well, occupation can last for hundreds of years (see Polands partition, or history of the Balkans)... Exactly THAT was the smart of your rulers, that they convinced Rus people to feel not as an occupied nation. Yet you negate their political sense all time.
    However, you are right saying it wasnt alliance. Lithuanians get all this land through diplomacy and conquest as well, and they were the dominating group.
    When I am talking about Slav superiority, I think mainly of numbers of slav inhabitants. This is what makes me think, that Lithuanians ruled the conquered nations with wise politics rather than a raw force. What doesnt belittle your achievments anyway, IMO.

    Vytautas was an absolute ruler, but the ruling mechanism wasn't strong. There were impressive possibilities of raising huge amounts of troops, but possibilities of keeping them continuosly under arms and besieging of well built fortifications - almost none. There was practically no administration, bureaucracy, or even places for training ppls to perform administrative tasks. Craftsmanship wasnt well developed. Distants were huge, road network poor and cities very small. News was arriving with more than a one-year delay. Thats why Teutonic Order was so superior in fight with GDL.

    BTW: Answer yourself, where would be Poland and Lithuania now if they hadn't cooperated then. IMO, maybe with a lot of luck Poland would be a weak and small survivor...without Pommerania, Silesia and Mazury. Maybe. I hope but don't belive. Would be there anything left of Lithuania? Teutonic Order had already taken Samogitia, and intended to crusade further. Baltic tribes on the lands they conquered were exterminated without a trace. Could be this alternative fine enough to perceive Polish-Lithuanian union so negatively?

    Position of Grand Duke against other nobles was much stronger than in Poland indeed, however subsequent successions were causing more and more troubles over time. All uncles, cousins etc. - look how many plots there were in times of Vytautas and Jogaila. IMO Lithuanian state was in constant danger of civil war among members of royal bloodline.
    I reffer to the thesis of Pavel Jasienica, polish historian, who thought that Lithuania grew in land faster than its administration could handle, which caused the general unstability. However expansion rate was great, there was practically no internal development. So it was giant, but on the mud feet. Every, even the slightest pressure from surrounding countries could have force this baloon to explode. And such threat appeared finally - Muscovy and Teutons were both aggressive and dangerous opponents.

    Yes, I think it is very interesting experience to face so different oppinions. It is important to wipe off USSR propaganda from our history. Remembering the western audience (in this case Firaxis :) ) that there is something else after Russia in the Eastern Europe, is a part of this. And I am talking here, because I hope of finding some kind of consensus. Hope you do too.
    Best regards.
  7. Undeadas

    Undeadas Chieftain

    Jul 20, 2001
    Kaunas, Lithuania
    For example: you (polish) could elect King without participation of Lithuanian noblemans :)

    Let's look from my side:
    1. How can I fell part of this if my country nearly lost it's nationality
    2. When we made that commonwealth stuff - we gave you Ukraine, and what did you? You lost it.... damn polish :) (ee - no offencive from me).
    3. From whic part you would look into the history - commonwealth ended by being divided to parts and occupied (anexed - shoudl I say) by other countries - so it actually - didn't stand test of time.

    Now look from Lithuanina view:
    * Polish can say - commonwealth was the bigest stuff they were part of by their own will. Lithuanian - can say - it was GDL :)
    * After some time (after WWI) - Polish tried to ocuppy and anex Lithuania as their "internal part". (only the force was enought to do so with Vilnius...) - and what was the main their reason? -> Commonwealth.

    (I'm not putting the good things that were given to GDL by commonwealth - there were such - but they were off under the stuff i written above )

    I understand that you don't claim Vilnius, I just question the thing that most Polish allways say "once Vilnius was more polish than lithuanian" - actually can you give any facts, that it was so?
    I'm asking of this, because in wikipedia, I found only one number telling about that time, and it was........ 2% !!! :eek:
    After that I was so stunned, that took my time to check facts... and I didn't find any neutrall survey information (the one is mentioned on wikipedia even wasn't accepted by League of Nations - because it was done by braking all international rules - and we know that when an army organizes any poll/questionare - it can show, that "elephants can fly"...).
    The next thing that I remmeber of the surveys - was made in 195x (in USSR - when it wasn't any reason to corrupt it) - there were about 40%-45% percent of lithuanians in Vilnius (about 30% of polish and else - russians).

    So - I didn't find any real fact/survey, that could let anybody to say, that in one time "there were more polish than lithuanians". So it's only my own involvement to find "do you know any reall survey on this question?" (I believe that in polish school books there can be put numbers, or so (in Lithuanian ones there aren't any numbers - only polish claims) - but is there really any fact letting us to say so? )

    The saying "because there were more polish than lithuanians - we occupied Vilnius" - isn't an argument for the number at all, reasons:
    * Polish claimed all Lithuania as thei internal part (they were putting such stuff in foreign conventions)
    * Even - they tried to make a power gap (and then polish army got to come and to stabilise the country....) all this is clearly know, because a lot of documents were confiscated and decrypted... (I'm talking about your P.O.W (Polish Organization Army) work in Lithuania)
    * Polish disagreed any requrement (made by League Of Nations) to make an independet survey of the nationality of Vilnius region.
    * I'm not talking that each and any independent inquiry assigned Vilnius to Lithuania.

    So have you any independent numbers, any knowledge of such survey?

    Stop. "Ruling mechanism" isn't the same thing as "strong economy". and yes - Lithuania didn't had a strong economy.
    What I'm trygin to say here: the "ruling mechanism" can only dispose resources, but even the wonderfull mechanism - can't use what it don't have (and GDL economy was really weak, and hardly could grow...).

    So you are just prooving other thing (weak economy), not the "weak ruling mechanism".

    Actually there were such things. That's why belarusians now try to claim GDL as their own - all chancellery, beuracracy text left - were in belarusian writings (if there would be no byreaucracy - there would be totaly no writings left from GDL times).

    The other thing - bereucracy can't be bigger than Economy, and that GDL economy was at low level (becaus all it's resources were used for defense - possibility for growing economy was very small).

    It sounds more like theory put like a tale..... (no facts, only the wrong ones...)
    And the ending part is even far from theme (wasn't here "any ruling mechanism") ?! (Teutonic Order was superior at a lot of things - and the ones you described aren't even the major ones).

    Now let's go back to the theme - rulling mechanism:
    * Some chancelor or even bureuacracy writings are left - there aren't many of them, but they are (in Vytautas and Jogaila time - it wasn't something new).
    * The tale about 1 year delays of news... Actually there are several mentions - that in a big need - messengers ride from one "castle" (those wooden stuff can hardly be called castles...) to another by changing horses there. So if there was a need - news could reach, not in one year, but in a month - yes.
    * GDL was a big thing, and there are known facts then some regions near the border declaried independece, or alliance with other faction... After Vytautas - such things vanished. So - if even in the border someone feels the rulling power - this shows, that some rulling mechanism is working.

    Like my grandfather liked to say "jei suo but nesikes - but zuiki pagaves" it translates like "if dog wouldn't be pooping - he would have cauth a rabbit".

    Only the hell knows what would have happened. But I should remmeber you how everything ended - commonwealth was occupied and divided by foreign forces. Maybe without alliance - it would have hapened faster, maybe everything would have acted diferently... Or maybe - we would be in the some place like we are now :)

    Actually a lot of stuff about Samogitia aren't said or put nicely. :)
    * First of all Teutonic Order got castles only about 10% deep into Samogitia territory - so it's hard to say that it was occupied.
    * Other facts - that Gediminas, Kestutis, Vytautas and other GDL Dukes used Samogitia warriors against Teutonic OPrder - shows something too.
    * Even the Duke Vytautas often made a deal with Teutons "to give Samoigitia to them".

    So all those claims about conquared Samoigitia aren't truth... There is even a joke - "we give Samoigitia to Cristians, then - it revolts and comes back to us, so after 10 years - we make another good deal for us, by giving Samoigitia...." - Samoigita it was german's first Staliningrad :D They took it, they claimed it, but never had it.

    You forgot to mentions, that Lithuanians got troubles with 2 orders: Teutonic and Livonians ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Northern_Crusades ).
    The second one was to the north of Lithuania, and after wars with GDL very weakened in military power.
    So the story about cristians and GDL isn't "game to one side". More than that - both orders lost big battles against GDL (both battles in Samoigitia). After that Teutonic order (Livonians allready dind't have enought power to make problems...) - changed it's tactics from "conquering" to "pillaging". That is to invade country, to burn somthing, and then to run back into safe castles...
    All talks about "totally weak GDL" - is kinda of nonsense. (Even more - while we were constantly invaded (it was period od 50 years, in each of it 80-120 invasions to our lands) ) - GDL managed to invade to east, and also - to attack Teutons too (about 30-50 invasions into their lands per year) (all these things are writen by german chroniclers). (Even Lithuanians managed to push to some Polish teritories... - but more in diplomatical way)

    Great nonsense with one esception:
    *In the north Latvians were conquered - but till these days they have their language - their nationality wasn't destroyed at all.
    *In the soth - Prussians were conquered - after their big revolutio agains Teutons - germans tried to erase that tribe - and succeeded - Prussian language is no more. But other thing is strange: from those times (13xx) - till German Empire (Bismark) MOST of Prussian population will be speaking lithuanian language (only Bismark organized acitvities and Black Death (plague) - changed the face of nationality...).

    So as you see - your scary tale isn't so scary....
    And yes - we needed paretner to destroy Teutonic power and to get christianized... You also need to dispose germans (well wasn't it Poland which lost war against Teutons in 1408?)... So yes - an alliance for this ok. - 1410 all goals are nearly achieved. And after that I say - thank you, and no to a commonwealth. A short alliance looks like better thing than a long one...

    Actually - saying "more and more" is overstating. Vytautas and Jogaila relations - is the only one known big trouble. And even during it - GDL was growing. (There are more known cases from before - but everything ended with one strong duke crontrolling all GDL...)
    IMHO - your opinion is overstating, even the biggest "civil war" didn't weaknesed the country...

    As I shown before - this is a scary tale, maybe to scare kids.
    Livonians - weaked.
    Teutons - unable to make any strong invasion for conquer.
    Polish - even they lost some of their lands to GDL.
    Muscovy - expansion was not from them, but from our side:
    Grand Duke Algirdas 1368, 1372 besieged Moscow. Last time - he take tribute from them and come home...

    So no - putting Lithuania as anything that could be blasted by any small push - it's more like a tale, not a historian reality... (and there are a lot of historians, each of them tends to have their own poitn of view - some of them - even crazy...)

    I very heavily query if firaxis would read such a lot ::lol:
    But yes - Russian were a small thing for a long long time.... :)

    Well you can think we have some kind of consensus on point of Belarusians in GDL.
  8. Eskel

    Eskel Chieftain

    Mar 19, 2006
    Poznań, Poland
    Well, you should rather say Lithuanian, Polish and Ukrainian nobles lost Ukraine. You still tend to blame Polish for Commonwealth weakness, forgetting about Lithuanian part.
    Many Polish peple says "It would be better, if we hadn't ally with Lithuanians that time, because many things could go better - instead of political reorienation to the east, leaving Silesia and Pommerania matters, changing country's economy into agricultural one, nobleman's privileges, which Jogaila used to buy a succession right for his son, etc.
    You seem to do the same think with GDL - what good is Lithuanian, but what wrong - was not your fault.

    I don't think that commonwealth was sth wrong - there were simply bigger sharks in the area, thats all. And look - there are very few european nation, that didn't lost their independence at least once for last thousand years. Italy,France,Germany, even Russia - they all have had such periods.
    We [polish, lithuanians and rus] made some errors, which caused Commonwealth's partition. I think those errors weren't undone after WWI, because instead of cooperation we started to play against each other, what only faovoured Russia interests.

    It is hypothesis, which cannot be verified. Anyone knows how would the alternative history look. I presented pessimistic version, you had optimistic - so we have draw, in fact.

    I found the number of 5% of Lithuanians in Vilnius in 1922. Please reffer to "God's Playground" by Norman Davies. He is a british historian, and I hope he knows his job well, or at least checked his demographic data at many sources. For me, his oppinion is much more reliable than Wiki.
    BTW: I think it would be nonsense, if Polish started to prove Szczecin(Stettin) and Wrocław(Breslau) to be polish city during 30's using data from late 50's. So, please, don't use soviet data from the same period concerning Vilnius.
    There is one more problem, however: a large number of polish speaking Lithuanians considered themselves Commonwealth's citizens (in XIXcnt. such Lithuanian was Adam Mickiewicz). Most of them in 1920 were loyal to revived Poland rather than Lithuania.

    Really? Which one? Ribbentropp-Molotov or Stalin-Churchill-Truman in Yalta?
    I don't negate Lithuanian's rights to Vilnius (I consequently use "Vilnius" form instead of polish "Wilno"), but - please - be fair, and dont call those examples from above "independent" inquiry. Besides, Lithuanian rights are sanctified sufficiently by medieval history and current status, you don't need soviet's grace.

    It was exaggeration and simplification, based on the fact that any military action required about one year for exchanging informations and preparation, for example war 1409-1411. The same problem was present later in Commonwealth - most small local conflicts have ended before army reached borders.

    And you still consider it strong ruling mechanism ??? By talking of possible weaknessess in GDL I really didnt want to offence Lithuanians, but rather explain why GDL has formed an alliance with Poland (or, at least, for what reasons from mine, polish point of view).

    After Vytautas, Jogaila became Grand Duke again. And after him Grand Duke of Lithuania was always King of Poland in the same time.

    In this we completely agree. Only the conclusion is different - it seems to me you say all the time that Commonwealth was wrong, while I would rather say it was good, but had gone wrong. You say - it should be finished right after 1410 - I say it is only hypothesis, as we cannot prove if it would have been better. Thus I have to admit, that you can call my oppinion hypothesis or over-optimistic as well.
    In fact I seek a way to calm down our nationalisms because I think cooperation and agreement (about the past as well) is better than lone-wolf strategy. And was hoping that power of Commonwealth in its origins (not in the end, of course) was a proof of this. If you think it is not sufficient, what more can I say?
    Uff, I started talking about ideology, and this forum is not place for this.

    I didn't mean it was totally weak. But Lithuania, despite its size, having lost Samoigitia or not, was weak enough to need this alliance...as well as Poland did. Conclusion - talking GDL was stroooong that ho ho!, and all its neighbour weak, seems to be a wishful thinking of yours. Especially, if you take into consideration that Lithuania was biggest under the rule of Algirdas, Vytautas couldnt get tribute from Muscovy, was defeated by Tartars near Worskla in 1401, couldn't get Samoigitia back after he had given it to Teutonic Order in 1398 [till the Grunwald's victory in 1410], fusion of Teutonic Order and Livonian Knights was only a matter of time [as they gained land connection through Samoigitia], and Pope could nearly in any moment call a crusede against Lithuania - last Pagan country in Europe...

    Hope some folks of Firaxis browses through Civ-fan forums frome time to time. Even if not, we can add some points in the Firaxis wishlist bulletin - I have no idea where can I find sth like this, but have read it exists.

    We have gone little far away from the main topic, but this discussion can cast a proper light on the mod case, and give it some depth. At least it may be used in description.

    Best regards (Pozdrawiam)
  9. HP_Ganesha

    HP_Ganesha Chieftain

    Apr 12, 2006
    Belem, Brasil!
    whow!!! Cara sempre que for nos teus posts eu vou escrever em portugues... acho uma merda fica escrevendo em Ingles para brasileiros... tipo eu ja falei que tu e o cara? porra so tu ta criando Civs animadas aqui que naum sejam meros skins... e se forem saum skins bem feitos :) flws
  10. Undeadas

    Undeadas Chieftain

    Jul 20, 2001
    Kaunas, Lithuania
    I'll just put down your words written nearly one month ago:
    "What had gone wrong? Rus and lithuanian nobles were strongly polonized, what caused them to separate from their peasantry, which thought of them as of polish oppressors. Knowledge of this fact come to the noblemen too late, what resulted in wars with Khmielnitsky's Cossaks, Ukraine defection to Russia"

    I can only add that after creation of "Both Republic" - Ukraine and a lot of other lands were given to Poland. Polish brought it to the situation, that Ukraine joined Russia, so yes - the loss was for both, but brought by Poland

    My position is simple - GDL wasn't strong, it was loosing lands so was looking for allies the bad thing - Commonwealth only helped (or maybe even didn't do that) to slow down the process (process of loosing lands and power).
    Commonwealth didn't help to GDL to become stronger, that's my point. The only good things were brought by Commonwealth were:
    * culturial things
    * and some modernisation
    But on the other hand:
    * the biggest loss was not Ukraine, or some other lands, but Lithuanian culture too
    * and modernisation - was good, but some reforms made the country only weaker (the things connected with GDL army and growing influence of noblemans, and Grand Duke loosing it's influence)

    So I don't see Commonwealth as something great. It just traded some problems to others, and didn't stop the proceses which it had to do.

    Well historians very often just put down were they get the data. And I really don't have a book (nor it is translated to Lithuanian), so if there is no mention "where he took data" - so numbers can be taken from anywhere, the thing that is more concerning in 1922 there was Polihs census organized by polish army... so... as I said before "when army is in town - census can show, that elephans can fly".

    Well actually it isn't as big nonsense as you want to show, why?
    * When polish occupied Vilnius (and it's region) - some of Lithuanians fled to Lithuanian controlled teritory ("living under polihs oppresion - wasn't easy"). So the percentage of polish could only increase.
    * USSR occupied Lithuania and gave Vilnius back to us. I belive some polish fled Vilnius now, but haven't heard of any mass lithuanina movement to the city... yes at this point percentage of polihs decreased.
    * In the start of WWII a lot of poles ran to Lithuania (at that time we controlled Vilnius). So the percentage of polish could only increase.
    * One week before Germany started war on USSR, and after the war, russians deported thounsands of lithuanians into Siberia (also such deportations were made in Latvia, Estonia... - they deported people based on their nationality). So the percentage of Lithuanians could only decrease.
    * After the War USSR started industrialization in Lithuania, this needed a lot of qualified workers, and at that moment A LOT OF russians arrived to lithuania (also to Latvia, Estonia - that's why half of all LAtvia are russians). So the percentage of lithuanians could only decrease.

    And in all this period, the percentage of Lithuanians in Vilnius increased by 33% ?! How is that possible? It;'s only one thing:
    * either the Russian census in 1959 was lying (it put 33.6% Lithuanians, and 20% polish)
    * or Polish census in 1931 was lying (it put 0.8% lithuanians and 65.9% as polish)

    Where is no reason to think, that till 1939 Polish census would show different numbers (well the population part of polish could only increase). So how it was possible in 20 years to change situation so much? If we got only stuff not good for lithuanians?
    The thing I'm pointing at - polish claimed more than they had, and cheated a lot about the numbers of populations in Vilnius.
    But the funniest thing - all data I gathered and saw, and that fit's reallity - the majority population of Vilnius was...... JEWS :D

    Adam Mickievic wasn't more loyal to Poland, he was loyal to Commonwealth, and really that man was a real multinational (that's why even Ukrainians claim him 8) ).
    But yes there were poeple speaking polish and thinking about old commonwealth, and truth there is that some Polihs speaking caled themselves Lithuanians, even a large part of russian speaking people caled themselves Lithaunians :)
    So your saying is only used for speculations :)

    1. 1919 December 08 - "Conseil Supreme" (the one that organized war against communists) draw a Curzon line - Vilnius in Lithuanian side.
    2. 1921 May 20 under the rule of The League of Nations Hyman offered compromise, again puting a border as Curzon line.
    3. 1921 June 28 - another project from League Of Nations (and the final one too, because both sides got reasons to disagree with it), in it ALL members of council voted that Vilnius should be recognized as part of Lithuania.

    I even didn't mention such small facts like:
    * In the late 1920 after Lithuanian army stoped it's march toward Vilnius - the special commision of League Of Nations, send Spanish and Japan delegations, they find that "Polish by occupying Vilnius has broken treaties and should leave Vilnius to Lithuania" (Polish as we no - dind't do so)
    * Council of League of Nations in 1920 late October, offered to solve problem with census made by and controlled by League of Nations. (polish disagreed to make such census! WHY? If there would be such majority as they say - there shouldn't be problems...)

    As you see there is no talk about "Ribbentropp-Molotov or Stalin-Churchill-Truman in Yalta" :) I take that your saying as a big joke :D

    Oh... 1409-1411 war there was the BIGGEST battle in the whole Europe of medieval age. So it's not surpsigin that armies were gathered coordinated, but slowly :)
    And when you talk about commonwealth - as I said before you talk about other think, than simple GDL (in commonwealth in GDL there was a very big reform how army should be gathered - they followed Polish example that wasn't a good one).

    Eskel - when we talk about GDL, we talk about a big country with long history. Where is difference if you talk about 1200-1430 period, or if you talk about 1430-1570, and also a big one if you talk about 1570-1795.

    Once you said, that "Lithuania grew too fast" - I dind't comment that, but actuly I have to do now it - that's a greatest nonsenss. GDL was growing from about 1200 till 1430. It took 200 years for it to become a Kingdom from the Baltic see till the Black see. That happened not by rule of one Grand Duke, but by several of them (several knwon and few unknown). In the first one period GDL was a strong and powerful kingdom. The fact, that western Teutonic order was unable to conquer Samoigitia (in 200 years it only entered 10% of it, and the whole border was full of their defencive castles) only shows these facts. Also in the first period - GDL was cemented from inside - created a ruling mechanism, rules how to gather army and so - all such things dind't happened in one short time.
    After Vytautas, and the end of Gediminaiciai and the start of Jogailaicia dynasty - GDL changed too - it was loosing it's strenght. So the second period was something there GDL lost about 33% of it's lands (well it took more than 100 years to loos them, but that was hapening)...
    The 3rd period started and Commonwealth was created with idea to strengthen Kingdom and to stop that decay proces (that was seen no only by gaingin military power, but also economical too because Polish were more advanced...).

    So - whne we talk about first perido - we see a powerfull illiteral country with really weak economy, but able to controll big lands, and to gather army in a fast "cheap" way.
    In second period - we see a country loosing it's power and in the end of it - we have no right to call it strong.
    In the 3rd period - we see the same thing we saw in second, just everything is done in different way, but the results are the same. And even worse - the last 100 years of Commonwealth was something there enemy armies marched through Lithuania (for the first time in the whole history Vilnius was captured - 1655, for some miracle reasons, Commonwealth lived till 1795... a long period, should I say, but full of bad news to it's readers... ).

    This isn't because of "any" polish fault, it was fault of lithuanians who were unable to keep up with other countries. But being together with Polish in Commonwealth - didn't make us (lithuanians, polish, russians) stronger, not in "military power". That's why I'm not rising and celebrating Commonwealth - that faction was stronger in words, but not in power and last hundred years looked like dead creature which don't know that he is dead...

    As some kind of historian I give priority to any point of view which is more near real history (whatever it was - good or bad...).

    Well Commonwealth made in 1569, half of Lithuania occupied in the first time in it's history: 1655. So where is that power? That it couldn't last vene for 90 years?
    If you could point out moments where Commonwealth was strong - we could make discussion about power.

    As I pointed out before - GDL was really weak when we made alliance. And actually I don't know why polish made alliance :)

    Okay, let's look at every point you made:
    * Vytautas here is often seen as the ruler of the strongest GDL. Why?
    ** Land question - Vytautas was the man who made a Kingdom between Baltic and Black sea, not Algirdas.
    ** Land question - Algirdas could have bigger territory only in that case, that you count in all lands which time at time paid tribute to GDL. Then yes - but such lands made their own foreign policy, so it's impossible to count them as part of GDL.
    * Power question. Power is calculated not by the lands, but by the ability to use those territories, one very big merit from Vytautas was that he made a stable country, changed a lot of smaller dukes, that where could be only one policy. For exapmle - Vytautas could bring to Grunwald more troops than Algirdas...
    * Muscovy question - Vytautas was more freindly to them, and was moving against Tatarians. Algirdas - wasmore frindly with Tatarians and was moving agains Muscovy. I think it is smart to fight only against one...
    * Tatars question. In 1401 Vytautas got a very strong defeat (that was a united army, of GDL, Teutonic order and poles, if I'm not lying). And yes - after that defeat he didn't make any more conquers to that side, but he also dind't lose the land he got. So - in that battle GDL expansion toward Tatars was stoped. And Worska don't show GDL as weaker country, even vice versa - in that battle there were about 2-3 times more army on Vytautas side :) Just few Tatarians tactical manoevure changed the luck of battle... (btw - the same thing latter happened in Grunwald...)
    * "Couldn't get back Samoigitia". Actually Vytautas "gave" Samoigitia 2 times to Teutonic order :) In the last treaty, he agrred to give Samoigitia to Teutonic when he will be the ruler of GDL. As we all know - he broke realations with Teutonic, by comming back to GDL and burning few of their castles... So there wasn't anyting like "we gave them Samoigitia".
    The other thing is that nor Vytautas, nor his Father was unable to push Teutons back from what they have captured 50 years ago... All that Samoigita thing was a stalemale front.

    Oh... tales... :)
    The first thing - land connection wasn't something what Teutons would be using. They allways used sea. So there was no strategical advance or I should say any "land connection".
    The most entered part to the north and to the "land connection" was Memel - build in 1252 - since that Teutons were unable to push any more...
    About crusedes - Pope was doing them for 200 years - and what? They were stuck. More than that in 1401 Vytautas led a crusede called by Pope against Tatarians :)
    So please - no more dreams and fairy/scary tales. I know, that some polish historians don'tlike Vytautas, but personal dislikes - isn't a reason to create tales.

    Strange, once I found it, but it was a lot of time ago :)
  11. Wolfstorm

    Wolfstorm Chieftain

    Aug 15, 2007
  12. sarelis999

    sarelis999 Chieftain

    Oct 18, 2007
    I am Lithuanian too. And Undeadas is right about all the wrong facts. Our biggest mistake was creating one republic with Poland, our dukes started to speak polish, think that lithuanian is a language of peasants, we lost our lands. And then, Austria, Prussia and Russia divided the republic three times, becouse Poland king was afraid of other countries. And our best times was after the Battle of Zalgiris, when united armies of Lithuania and Poland (afcourse there was other countries armies, becouse the Lithuanians weren't the last pagans at that time, so it was kinda like Sacred War) defeated army of Germany (Kryziuociai), but it contained mens from other countries, becouse the pope did everything to destroy the last pagans. The United Armies of Pagans were loosing, then Vytautas and his men "fled" from the battlefield to the woods, the regrouped, and returned killing every christien in their way. So after 1410 war, our Duke Vytautas expanded GDL all the way to Black Sea. When Vytautas died, Lithuania and Poland created one republic, and then we became weak. But it is true that we didn't have good horseman, becouse there were lots of swamps in our land, so horses and heavily armed warriors could easily drown. So we mainly had light armored warriors.
  13. dxglide

    dxglide Chieftain

    Apr 15, 2007
    Im lithuanian too :D
  14. dxglide

    dxglide Chieftain

    Apr 15, 2007
    im suggesting to create Vytautas the Duke (almost the king) leader. He was creative and charismatic (or expansionist). And he is has more achievement neither Mindaugas .
  15. MaxRiga

    MaxRiga Chieftain

    Feb 1, 2004
    Lithuanian empire wasn't really developing it self only because it was absolutely bad in trade. So, I think ur chose to make it "Expansion" and "Financial" isn't really correct :)
    It's definitely "Expansion" and may be more "Religion" since it was under huge Polish catholic influence.
  16. Pangur Bán

    Pangur Bán Deconstructed

    Jan 19, 2002
    No language is older or newer than any other, unless of course they're invented.

    But to the point, Lithuanian and Latvian are definitely the two most conservative Indo-European languages, in that they are closer to the way PIE (Proto-Indo European) is supposed to have been like than any other Indo-European languages.
  17. Pangur Bán

    Pangur Bán Deconstructed

    Jan 19, 2002
    Just to add my bit; Lithuania is cooler without Poland being involved. 19th and early 20th century Polish romantics and nationalist historians have done a great deal to diminish the achievements of the "Grand Duchy" of Lithuania, claiming credit for instance for the mostly Lithuanian victory at the battle of you-know-what. But Lithuania would be the coolest and most distinctive civ that firaxis could add to civ4.

    Anyways, the "Grand Duchy" was pretty Rus'ianised by the late 14th century (its silly to talk about Belorussians, Ukrainians and Russians as if they were separate nationalities then); naturally given that something like 9/10ths of the population ruled directly or indirectly by the High King of Lithuania were Rus'ians. To illustrate this, the German chronicler Henry of Diessenhoffen reported that when High King Kestutis agreed a treaty with the Hungarian king, the men with Kestustis' swore an oath "in Lithuanian", which was recorded as Rogachina roznenachy gospanany ... Rus'ian, not Baltic Lithuanian.

    That's not to say Lithuania-proper was Rus'ianised; it wasn't, and Samogitia was especially staunch in its Baltic pagan culture, but the state was certainly becoming so. Jogaila himself, son of a Rus'ian mother, and little known to Poles these days, had actually been an Orthodox Christian in his youth, presumably nominally converting to paganism to become High King, before then converting to Catholicism to gain dominion over the Poles.
  18. Uhlan

    Uhlan Chieftain

    Sep 29, 2007

    Don't forget the Lipka Tartars!!!

    You could have Charles Bronson as a leader type! :lol: His Father and Mother were Lithuanian immigrants and of Lipka Tartar ancestry.


    The Tartar Nobility spoke Polish, but the burghers and lesser nobility spoke Belorussian.

    The Tartar Princes were only recognised if they were decended from the ruling house of the "Golden Horde".

    The non-royal Tatar nobility in order of precedence:

    Called Hospodar's Tatars. Princes of the blood, sometimes called "carewicze" (tsarevitje) meaning “sons of the tsar,”

    Next, the begs or beys. The use of the princely titles of bey or beg (kniaz and 'tsarevij') was subsequently abandoned from the 17th century.

    Then the murza (mirza or murza from emir-zade, literally a “son of emir” i.e. "a son of the ruler"). This is what the Tatar princes used in Poland.

    Finally the uhlans (oglan or ohlan meaning “brave” - dominus or miles would be fairly correct translations into medieval, feudal Latin). This is what I take my name from... well, actually the Prussian Uhlans, but many were of Polish decent anyway.
  19. BitlasLt

    BitlasLt Chieftain

    Mar 31, 2008
    Thanks for this civ.
    Uniqe unit should be forest swordman or somthing like that.(huge bonnus in deffence).Or call it Zemaitis:DCouse in the begening we won alotof battles just becose of forests and swamps.(One of the famoust is Saules,about 2000lithuanians deafeated crusaders ordin in the forest.5000or more soldiers was slugtered).
    mayby some unique buildings:
    Basketball hall(+3happeness -1work:d)(in modern era)
  20. cawx

    cawx Chieftain

    Jun 12, 2008
    I think of the 2 leaders for Lithuania - King Mindaugas or Gediminas the Great Duke and Smetona

Share This Page