I know we established that interwar Lithuania was a republic, but I found something very interesting and possibly useful. From http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mindaugas_II_of_Lithuania:
Mindaugas II of Lithuania was a king-elect in 1918. The Lithuanian Council elected on July 9th, 1918 Wilhelm Herzog von Urach, Graf von Württemberg (1864-1928), to king of Lithuania.
Since Germany in the end of 1918 was on her way to lose the war, on November 2nd, 1918 Lithuania rapidly changed her constitution to a republic.
Since *there* Germany did was NOT on her way to lose the war, I can see any reason why Lithuania would have developed into a republic. Somehow it makes much more sense like this! Anyone have an opinion? IJzeren Jan 05:56, 17 Feb 2005 (PST)
no arguments with it...not from me anyway. BoArthur
- Sounds good to me! - Nik 12:32, 17 Feb 2005 (PST)
(Moved from Lla Dafern#Hi)
Okay. Lithuania. I am indeed in charge of the RTC, but I have to admit that I don't know much the Grandduchy yet, and that I know even less about that language. Most of what I know is written down on the Lithuania page, but not all. Have you seen the RTC page? Much as I like your work on Lithuanian political parties and factions, it's a little bit against QSS. That does not mean that I want to discard you work in any way; on the contrary, I'd like to incorporate it somehow, but I need to think about a way. Well, with the common RTC pattern of ever-changing parties and alliances, that shouldn't be much of a problem. BTW, since you know Lithuanian, please have a look at the list of Lithuanian political parties I proposed . It's in my best Lithuanian, but I'm still not sure about everything!
You might always want to have a look at my news page. Especially the bits about the Galician-Volhynian referendum are of importance to Lithuania. The current political situation is quite messy, and the corruption of its government is enormous!
Here are a few thoughts I'm having about Lithuania.
First of all, I've been wondering lately if Lithuania should really be a grandduchy or rather a kingdom instead. Of course, traditionally it was a grandduchy. But one established fact that I wouldn't like to change is that it existed as an independent kingdom in the years 1918-1939 (under the German-installed king Mindaugas II). I have been assuming that that country was such an incredible mess that during the late thirties it sought reunification with Veneda again, and that "somehow" the two were reunified after GW2, and Lithuania once again became a Grandduchy. Now, what I am wondering about is this: wouldn't it be far more likely that if the two merged on an equal base, Lithuania would have remained a kingdom (in personal union with Veneda)? Or would the Lithuanian king himself have changed his title from "king" to "grandduke"? What do you think?
Secondly, the provinces. When I first drew my map I frankly did not know much about Lithuania's historical regions. At present we have Samogitia, Vilnius province, Suślewia, Polesia, and Volhynia. What I'm wondering about if it wouldn't be better to modify the Samogitian border somewhat and split Vilnius province in two different provinces, Auksztaitija and Dzûkija. Perhaps even into three, with Sudovia as a separate province. I know it's against QSS, but since this is an internal matter to the RTC, I don't think anyone would object. What's your opinion?
And at last, we have the language. The orthography in particular. Keeping in mind that Lithuania *there* NEVER was part of the Russian Empire, I don't really see *here*'s orthography of Lithuanian emerge so easily, especially given the fact that Czech doesn't play the same role *there* either. Before the First World War (and mutatis mutandis the First Great War), Lithuanian used an orthography that was strongly based on Polish/Wenedyk. Now it cóuld of course be that the nationalists, who ruled Lithuania in the Interwar period, introduced an orthography that was as different from Wenedyk as possible on purpose. But what strikes me as far more likely, is that the Wenedyk-based orthography was always maintained in Lithuania. And that therefore we write sz, ż, cz, û instead of š, ž, č, ų, etc. Against, what do you think about that?
Cheers, IJzeren Jan 13:28, 18 Sep 2005 (PDT)
As for orthography, I think it is quite likely that nationalists would have changed it; in the real world up until first world war and Lithuanian independence, Lithuanian language also commonly used "sz", "w", etc. - but after independence some originally Polish words were removed and so was orthography. Therefore, I guess similar would have happened in Bethisad, though I am not sure about this. Or maybe if no taking it from Czechs the nationalists would have introduced new letters, but based on some other languages or completely new alterations of latin alphabet.
As for provinces, I think it is ok this way, as with the exception of Samogitia, ethnographic regions did not ever play a part in politics of Lithuania; therefore it would be easier to assume that the provinces were carved out artificially or based on power/lands of some local nobles or such. Border of hhistorical Samogitia was further west and it did not include Kaunas, but this could be explained by some event due to which the boundaries of Samogitia were expanded and capital moved (from Varniai/Medininkai, which was capital of real Samogitia). I however have this idea that Federalists whom I mentioned in my edit of Lithuania and some parties sees the current partitioning of RTC into provinces as outdated, and instead would propose a reform to establish a new system, based more on ethnic boundaries and historical regions (it for example would include province of Kashubia, partition the Prusy province into Prussian-majority Prussia with capital at Tvanksta (Old Prussian name for Koenigsberg), Lithuanian-majority Lithuania Minor (with capital at Tilžė or Gumbinė) and the Vededic majority, maybe Masuria, partition of Lithuania according to ethnographic regions and other such suggestions). This would be just a proposal however (that is, not a real change of provinces), and would not be supported by everyone in RTC but only by some parties of it. Sudovia is also a bad name I guess as in Bethisad it seems Sudovians/Yatvingians remained as a nation, so I'd suggest to reffer to that ethnographic region of Lithuania as "Užnemunė" (Transnemun in English maybe), which was a name for the general area used at some places in real world too; while Sudovia would be the name for the land of Sudovians, "Jotva" in Lithuanian (from Yatvingians).
As for language, I think what needs to be done is lituanisation of Lithuanian names for some of southern cities. As in real world, only names of the cities in the north of former grand duchy has actually Lithuanian sounding counterparts (e.g. Bialystok/Albokliv - Balstogė, Grodno/Hrodna - Gardinas and such), that is, in the areas close or in past part of Lithuanian ethnic lands. This is due to teh fact that the Grand Duchy existed before times of nationalism, and Lithuanian language, due to Lithuania staying pagan for long, took longer to develop in writting matters, therefore Ruthenian was used in writting matters of real GDL, later to be changed by Polish. Then in real world when Lithuanian patriotism rised, Grand Duchy was already history and so Lithuanian names for these cities did not develop; and when they are used now they are just adding Lithuanian endings to actually Slavic names. If Grand Duchy would have remained all this time I think this wouldn't have happened, and more Lithuanian-spounding names would have developed (same as e.g. Polish (and in Bethysad Wenedyk) names developed for Lithuanian cities, such as Olita - Alytus and those that were farther away such as Ponewiež - Panevėžys, due to teh fact of usage of Polish as written language in Lithuania and as usually first foreign language for intelectual people; stance that is of Lithuanian language in southern territories in Bethysad currently. So Lithuanian names for cities like Luck should be more Lithuanian than Luckas IMO; maybe some ethymological conversion such as really (in real world) happened with Bialystok - Balstogė (Balstogė means white roof too, just in Lithuanian), in other cases just changing of some sounds (same as Liepoja and Daugpilis, Lithuanian names for Liepaja and Daugavpils in real world), and maybe in a few cases even have some cities named after Lithuanian leaders of various times. I already lituanised one Lithuanian name, using "Raunas" instead of common "Rovnas", on analogy with Kaunas (which is Kowno in Polish, Kovno in former Russian).
Yes I guess kingdom would be a more appropiate name in such case, if it is worth changing. And as always, it might be possible to think up events to support the current version of Bethisad history, including the republic and such (e.g. revolution against corrupt monarchy or such).
I written in the Lithuania page these units as factions (coalitions) rather than as parties, which is noted; i.e. units which are formed in parliament by differnet parties after each elections. The names, whcih are given, are more or less traditional for some factions, which are named, while others comes and disappears after another elections. I looked through the list of parties at that page in past too. As for mistakes, "Darba" should be "Darbo", "Zaliujų" shoulsd be "Žaliųjų".
And no, I am not at Conlang.
Abdul-aziz 15:27, 18 Sep 2005 (PDT)
- Well, we omit that problem if we decide to turn Lithuania into a Kingdom after all. Frankly, I think that would be much better. When I "invented" the Grandduchy, I had no idea yet about an independent Lithuanian kingdom before GW2. Given the fact that the two states merged on an equal basis, it would be far more logical if the Lithuanian King remained king. I know it is against QSS, but given the fact that it is an internal matter of the RTC I don't think that should be much of a problem. Unless you of somebody else would object, of course!
- In fact, this is how I see the birth of the RTC. Before 1914 it was probably still known as the "Republic of Both Nations", consisting of a strong Kingdom of Veneda and a weak Grand-Principality of Lithuania. The merger of two equal kingdom would in that case have been the beginning of something new: the RTC.
- Now that I think of it, I'm quite sure that although Lithuania was independent during the Interwar period, the King of Veneda still maintained the title "Grand-Prince of Lithuania" in his style. Now it would be quite typical for the RTC if the current kings are "King of Lithuania" and "Grand-Prince of Lithuania" at the same time!
- Now I will address Abdul-Aziz' remaining points:
- Orthography. It's quite possible and even probable that the nationalists changed it. Given the political conditions at the time, they might have modelled it after German or Scandinavian. But no matter what, the nationalists thoroughly screwed up, and I wonder if later generations wouldn't have changed it back with some modifications. Remember that there are significant differences between the situation *here* and *there*. First of all, while in OTL there was no Poland before 1914 and Lithuania was under Russian occupation, Lithuania in IB was part of the RTC (which then may still have been known as the "Republic of Both Nations"), where the language was probably better off and must have had an established literary tradition already by the 1850s. Furthermore, keep in mind that the two states once again merged into one; a strong argument for using the same alphabet is that the Veneds and Lithuanians probably used the same typewriters.
- A secondary argument for using a different orthography is BTW that its easier ("cleaner") to ascribe certain actions to f.ex. Mr. Woldemaras, a name mostly restricted to IB, than to Mr. Voldemaras, who as you know existed in reality. Compare this to the difference between *here*'s Mikhail Gorbachev and *there*'s Mikhail Gorbachenko; the latter is an easy sockpuppet whom can do anything we like him to do, while in the case of a *Gorbachev in IB we'd have to be far more careful.
- Provinces. I like your idea of keeping the status quo intact for a while, and steering towards to proposal for administrative redivision. That gives us plenty of food for further, future action! I'm not sure if I would really include the Kashubians in the process, though. The way I see it, Veneda and Lithuania are pretty much separate entities, and a province in Lithuania is not necessarily the same as, and has not necessarily the same authority as, a province in Veneda.
- City names. I agree with you about the Lithuanisation of the names of southern cities. I'm of course open to any proposal. Keep in mind that the name "Balstogė" is obviously based on the (Polish) name "Białystok", which *there* does not exist and never existed. The Lithuanian name should therefore probably be based on the Wenedyk equivalent (Ałbokliw, a calque), something like "Alboklivas" I suppose. I'm not particularly happy with "Luckas" either, but I couldn't think of anything better. I pretty much like "Raunas", on the other hand. Would the town of Kovel also be "Kaulas" in Lithuanian?
- Parties and factions. Thanks for the corrections, I'll modify the page accordingly. I think there will be a way to bring your faction idea in accordance with my parties (I admit, there names are not very original, but that's what you get when you don't know the language!). A few remarks, though. First, you mention the Didžiosios kunigaikštystės krikščioniška garbė (if we turn Lithuania into a kingdom instead, that would probably be Lietuvos Karalystės krikščioniška garbė, DKKG, wouldn't it? But here's one problem: Lithuania is predominantly Romuva. That's a piece of QSS that I inherited when I adopted the RTC and cannot be changed. We could of course say that Romuva is the religion of the poorer Lithuanians, while the ruling class is (still) thoroughly venedised and Catholic (the Belarusians and Ukrainians are of course Orthodox like *here*).
- Secondly, what I miss is a leftist faction. Were would you place the LSDDP and the LSLP, not even to mention the communists? I suppose they wouldn't fit in either the DKKG (LKKG) or the right-liberal ML, and will rather have their own faction, no?
- Cheers, IJzeren Jan 07:50, 19 Sep 2005 (PDT)
Firstly I would like to note that Romuva is a bad name for this religion; it is only used for the neopaganism practicised now (and only in Lithuania, not Latvia, where neopaganism is reffered s Dievturi or something like that) and was not used for paganism in past, and as I understand the pagan tradition was never broken in Bethisad. Romuva really meant some kind of center of Baltic paganism (it supposedly was somewhere in Prussia), supposedly named after Rome - the center of Catholic faith - but such explaination was most probably invented by teutonic knights, who naturally wanted to see similarities between the only religion their knew well (Catholicism) and the religion they encountered. It is unclear werether in reality Baltic paganism had any center; which leaves much space for writting about what the religion really is in Bethisad. I would suggest naming it Baltic faith or Balticism maybe (on analogy with Hinduism, which is also a collection of several faiths and name for which comes from location Hindustan).
I would support the idea that ruling class is catholic, although after the national revival most are not venedised (as it would trigger people against them; some still might be venedised, but more tolerant towards usage of other languages) and, together with the lowering importance of religion, much more tolerant towards paganism and other faiths and some nobles actually being atheists. As for Belarusians/Ukrainians, I would like to note that in reality the Republic of Both nations started a conversion of them to Catholicism and this is how Eastern Rite Catholicism (or Greek Catholicism, as opposed to Roman Catholicism), unique blend of Catholicism and Eastern Orthodoxism was born; many Belarussians and Ukrainians were converted, but most were converted back by Russians once they came; this wouldnt'd have happened in Bethisad as Russians did not came. In real world even now there are some Eastern rite Catholics in Belarus and Ukraine, they has some Orthodox practices but are loyal to the Pope.
It would be Karalystės krikščioniška garbė; Lithuania is purposefully left out for political reasons as they sees themselves as a cosmopolitic, conservative faction, some of them (although not all) would want even further integration with Veneda which they says would make the nation stronger, and such. They are quite leftist actually and most of parties comprising thes efactions uses leftist ideologies; I imagine it as such situation where nobles more relies on the poor people, which are easier to manipulate and can be given some money in social guarantees and such and then support government, and the nobles does not trusts the new elite, which is rich and gets increasingly powerful but many of them does not belongs to any clans, and most of them are rightists and supports the parties in Modern Lithuania factions. Therefore nobles wants themselve sto be seen as good and well, noble, people who helps the poor and such, and the new elite to be seen as some who would sell their mothers if they could. There would be various smaller factions too of course, that is not a full list; while some radical parties would not be admitted/want to form any factions and would be on their own in seimai.
Balstogė is not a version of Bialystok, but rather a translation; as I understand, same is Albokliv (as in Albarus as I understand Alba means white). Balstogė comes from Baltas (white) and stogas (roof). Original name for the city comes from Belarussian I think BTW and is Belastok, so I assume in Bethysad Veneds use the translated name; such ethymological translations happen, not only IRL in this case, but also e.g. in the interwar the Lithuanian name used for Saint Petersburg was Petrapilis, more or less direct translation of Peterburg.
I am not sure if Kaulas would be good but maybe; first it needs to be searched if there have been real Lithuanian names, which happened to go out of use with time; similarly to the Petrapilis example I given. Also it more or less happened with Balstogė, whcih is now only at some places is used in Lithuanian, while in other cases now Bialystokas is used instead.
As for alphaet, I think werether it would have been changed back or not would depend on various reasons more than jst political, same as e.g. in real world Kazakhstan does not goes back from cyrillic and none of central Asian states went back to Arabic script after end of USSR and instead opted latin alphabet. Reasons for not changing back might be cost of such change, no real need for it, as well it might be so that new alphabet seems to be easier to use (e.g. latin is easier to use than Arabic script for languages other than Arabic), therefore it'd depend on what exactly script would have been introduced and how better/worse (easier/harder) for writting Lithuanian than wenedyk script it would be. Woldemaras and Voldemaras would be the same surname anyways, similar sounding.
As for federalism, I see it as an idea which exists in all the RTC, but is stronger in some regions and less strong in some others. So it might be so that it is stronger in Lithuania, or maybe not - I am not fully decided at this. The partitioning of Lithuania according to historical region sis also on agenda of Lithuanian National Guards factions according to my view; which might be seen as nationalist by some of the minorities as then there would be more Lithuanian-majority provinces than non-Lithuanian majority provinces. Abdul-aziz 10:40, 19 Sep 2005 (PDT)
- Romuva. Okay, what you write makes sense. Again, the name Romuva has a long history in IB, but your arguments seem convincing enough. If Dan (our resident specialist on paganism in general) agrees, let's call it "Balticism". The religion must undoubtedly have evolved quite a lot over the centuries; I'm curious what it would look like in its current embodiment (do they throw people off rocks, too?). BTW, it would be cool to have some kind of center, wouldn't it? The name "Romuva" might have stuck somehow in the form of some village of that name in Prusy, no? Anyway, feel free to elaborate the Baltic religion, Dievturi included.
- Orthodoxy. Yes, I have to admit that you have a point. But keep in mind that the borders of the RTC/RBN after the partitions were not the same as they are now. Some Belarussians, Polessians and Ukrainians actually did come under Russian rule. So I suggest they were converted back to Orthodoxy. It would make sense if those who were on the other side of the border were indeed Greek-Catholic. That would also explain the lack of homogeneousness in those parts. BTW, I think the Orthodox of the Belarussian provinces and Volhynia are part of a separate Orthodox church, probably a Lithuanian-Orthodox one.
- Factions. Okay, Karalystės krikščioniška garbė it will be. I like the idea of a Catholic, slightly-venedised-but-not-too-much nobility that cares a little more for the poor than the new rich and engages in charity and the like.
- Federalism. Agreed. In fact, regionalism is quite strong in Veneda, too. In some cases ethnicity is a factor in that, but not necessarily. It's not really a matter of political colour either. The main factor I guess is who is in charge and where: the local nobility and the provincial authorities both like to keep as much power as possible for themselves.
- Balstogė. Yes, Ałbokliw is a translation; kliw means "hill", and ał means indeed "white".
- Kaulas: well, unless you can find a real Lithuanian name, let's keep it for a while.
- Alphabet. Indeed, Qazaq did not go back from Cyrillic, but Azerbaydzhani did. Furthermore, AFAIK these languages did not have much of a written tradition before they were incorporated anyway; it was developed mostly under Soviet rule. Keep also in mind that these countries were much longer under Russian/Soviet rule than IB Lithuania was independent. As for the cost of such change: of course, that is true. But I doubt very much if the transition from one orthography to another was ever complete at all. Far more likely IMO is that many people continued using the old orthography anyway and kept pushing for its restoration. As for Woldemaras and Voldemaras: of course these sound the same, but they look a little different. Remember that 99,9 % of what we produce here is visual/readable and not audible!
- Cheers, IJzeren Jan 01:42, 20 Sep 2005 (PDT)
- Yes, I think there is some village Lithuanian name of which is Romuva... But I am not sure, maybe I am wrong. It's hard to search as now in real world the names are changed completely into not related Russian ones.
- I agree about the religion (orthodoxy/Greek catholicism and such). And yes, I think Lithuanian-orthodox church would also have formed if Lithuania continued to have many orthodox lands. However, as I understand many of the people in southern lands of Lithuania would actually be converted to Greek Catholics once; and in that case I am not sure if Lithuanian Orthodox church would have formed; and if it would, it would probably be formed in the Belarusian-populated lands in the east, whcih are by now part of Belarus and probably Russian Orthodox (or Belarusian Orthodox), if I understand it correctly.
- As for alphabet, ok, it can be that way. Abdul-aziz 03:05, 20 Sep 2005 (PDT)
- I explained more about alphabet at the new article Lithuanian colonies, i hope you will like it, as it, telling that there exists several alphabets, gives some room for interpretation and creation of these alphabtes, and probably won't require to change everything into some single alphabet. Abdul-aziz 10:51, 20 Sep 2005 (PDT)
"Romuva" vs. "Balticism"
Just a wee note: if, as Abdul says, Romuva isn't an appropriate name for the religion (given his explanation, I rather agree) it should be changed. But not to "Balticism" in my opinion- "Balticism" sounds like a political ideology, not a religion. The other major pagan religions Cravethism and Hinduism use native names which essentially mean "religion"- An Graveth and Sanatana Dharma respectively- the English form "Cravethism" is clearly derived from the native term. Although I don't know any Lithuanian, I'd recommend something like an Anglicisation of the Lithuanian word for "(old) religion" or "tradition" with the suffix -ism. Deiniol 18:30, 12 March 2006 (PST)
I've finally decided to adopt Marc's proposal for a new flag of Veneda:
The old flags for Veneda and Lithuania were, franklky, something I made up in a hurry, and I was never completely satisfied with them, but neither could I think of a better alternative, so that's why I left them anyway. But I think Marc's flag is really nice and better fitting.
This means, that Lithuania will probably need another flag as well. Any thoughts on this, Abdul-Aziz? As far as I am concerned, anything will do. Perhaps *here*'s Lithuanian yellow-green-red flag? Or perhaps a red flag with the Vytis? Or a combination of both? Something else?
- Here's Lithuanian flag was criticised now nad then for not being based on country's heraldic tradition (colors, etc.). While there were over 100 years of Russian occupation between the times of Lithuanian Grand Duchy and the interwar Republic this was not the case in IB, so probably the flag would be more related to flags used by LGD (red flag with Vytis). As for nowhowever it is QSS that this particular flag is flag of Free Lithuania and interwar Lithuania (and different from modern Lithuanian and maybe XIX century flag). I'll see what I could do and maybe come up with proposals if I'll think of something that I'd think would fit better than current flag. Abdul-aziz 04:38, 3 August 2007 (PDT)
I’m afraid that there will be problem with this new flag of Veneda. As a person who know a little bite of Polish heraldry I can not accept this flag, unfortunately. You see, there is a ring over the eagle tail with indicate feudal dependence. This eagle form Marc’s proposal is very similar to those of Greatpoland in the times of feudal split of Polish Kingdom in XIII century and nowadays Greatpoland Voivodship. In the other hand this is not a very big deal and if you don’t feel bad with this I have no other objections. As for flag of Lithuania, if you want something more LGD like, the COA of independent Belarus could be right. Follow by white rabbit 06:57, 3 August 2007 (PDT)
- ring removed, problem solved --Marc Pasquin 21:55, 3 August 2007 (PDT)
- OK ;-) Follow by white rabbit 00:30, 4 August 2007 (PDT)
- That seems to settle the issue. I'm glad Veneda finally has a decent flag now!
- As for Lithuania, I have a somewhat wild idea...
- As you know, Lithuania's position with the Republic of Both Nations grew weaker and weaker over the centuries. Then, in 1918, as a result of German interference, Lithuania became an independent state. Naturally, the ideology of this state was strongly anti-Republic. Much along the lines of: "To hell with the Republic! What good did it do for us? We're better of on our own!" Would it perhaps be possible that Interwar Lithuania adopted the yellow-green-red flag, like they did *here*? As some sort of break with the past? If so, Free Lithuania might still be using that flag, while current Lithuania, as part of the RTC, would be using the red flag with the Vytis (which in the eyes of the nationalists might be way too similar to Veneda's flag anyway. How about that? —IJzeren Jan Uszkiełtu? 00:50, 4 August 2007 (PDT)
Although new Veneda flag’s quality left much to be desire (as a future IT pro I must keep my eye on such things and if I found similar one in better quality or even vector one I will inform you) this solution sounds good to me, more over Free Lithuania may still use Vitis COA but with blocks (columns) of Gediminas, while RTC’s Lithuania with Jagiellons’ crosses. Also the Belarusian version of Vitis (the Pohonia) slightly modified would fit much better to this new Veneda flag in my opinion. I even have some a proposals. What do you think about that? Follow by white rabbit 06:52, 4 August 2007 (PDT)
Since Free lithuania was backed by the germans, they might have adopted a german type cross:--Marc Pasquin 22:46, 4 August 2007 (PDT)
- Ok, I will decide later. The way I understood it from what I've read at Jan's website and elsewhere is that the position of Lithuania did not always detarioriate under RBN, but sometime in 19th century a Lithuanian national revival happened and Lithuanian state (that was once reduced to minor importance under May constitution) was reinstated (inside RBN). I assumed that this might have been the time when a new flag was adopted to mark the change. The change was not enough however in the opinion of some (and those who established independent Lithuania) and the independent Lithuania might have readopted the old flag (changing the Cross of Jogaila to Towers of Gediminas) associating it primarilly with the times before the union with Veneda (the change might have happened immidietly after independence or after 1926 coup). Of course, they may have adopted entirely new flag as well. What do you think about it Jan? Abdul-aziz 08:08, 8 August 2007 (PDT)
- It's quite possible that Lithuania adopted a new flag symbolising its renewed glory within the RBN in the 19th century!
- Anyway, it's really up to you, Augustinas! I'll comply with anything you decide. So, if I understand you correctly, it would be something like this:
- 1569 - 1867 ?
- 1867 - 1918 Red flag with Vytis and Cross of Jogaila
- 1918 (1926) - 1939 Red flag with Vytis and Towers of Gediminas
- In addition to that, whatever the Lithuanian flag between 1918 (1926) and 1939 were, it was later adopted by Free Lithuania.
- So, this leave open the question, what Lithuania's postwar flag would be. Probably not the same flag as before 1918, since before that time Lithuania was a grandduchy, while after 1949 it exists as an equal kingdom within the RTC. Is there perhaps anything heraldic related to king Mindaugas? Or would that already have been used in the Interwar period? —IJzeren Jan Uszkiełtu? 11:32, 8 August 2007 (PDT)
- The way I thought about it previously was:
- ?-19th century - Red flag with Vytis and Cross of Jogaila
- 19th century-1918 or 1926 - Current flag
- 1918/1926-1939 (up to now in Free Lithuania) - Red flag with Vytis and Columns of Gediminas
- 1947-1949(?) - Some Snorist flag
- 1949 up to now - Current flag
- But indeed you are right that probably modern flag would have been created anew. Anyways I will probably decide or put to offer all 3 or 5 flags of Lithuania at once. Flag of Pakštuva also may need a change then. Thank you for suggestions posted here, I may indeed use some of them. I don't know of any heraldic tradition relating to king Mindaugas. Abdul-aziz 06:49, 10 August 2007 (PDT)
- Before 1918 Lithuania *here* also had a flag similar to the red flag with Vytis and Cross of Jogaila: http://www.fotw.net/flags/lt_ldk.html . So that fits. In fact, I'm only wondering whether Lithuania would not have adopted a new flag in 1918, which could have been substituted after the coup d'etat in 1926. In that case we'd end up with something like:
- until ca. 1867: red flag with Vytis/Jogaila
- ca. 1867 - 1918: other flag with Vytis
- 1918 - 1926: yellow-green-red flag with or without Vytis/Gediminas
- 1926 - 1939 (up to now in Free Lithuania): red flag with Vytis/Gediminas
- 1947-1949: some snorist flag
- 1949 - date: current flag: yellow-green-red with Vytis/Jogaila
- Plenty of possibilities. I could very well imagine that in 1918 independent Lithuania adopted the same flag as they did *here*, i.e. the yellow-green-red flag with or without the Vytis. You mentioned yourself that not everybody was satisfied with it, so PERHAPS it was changed after the coup d'etat into something "more genuinely Lithuanian", i.e. a red flag with a Vytis, probably with the columns of Gediminas:
- As for the snorist flag, perhaps they used the Vytis, too? After all, not every snorist country must necessarily have an eagle or another stylised kind of animal. If that be the case, then Lithuania's current flag might be without the Vytis. Or, snorist Lithuania would be using the columns of Gediminas only: http://www.fotw.net/flags/lt_ldk.html
- As for a current flag, I sort of like this one:
- But then again, I leave it all up to you! —IJzeren Jan Uszkiełtu? 01:42, 11 August 2007 (PDT)
- For the Snorist flag, how about a golden 2 armed cross over a white helm on a blue background ? --Marc Pasquin 04:45, 11 August 2007 (PDT)
- That, of course, raises another interesting question: what would snorist policy have been regarding religion in Lithuania (with its Slavic minorities stripped off)? Would they support Roman Catholicism, since it is at least Christian and closer to Orthodoxy, or would they support Baltic paganism instead, which may be not Christian but is at least much closer to Slavic tradition? —IJzeren Jan Uszkiełtu? 07:35, 11 August 2007 (PDT)
- I am glad to see that my proposals could be useful. As for the SNORist Lithuanian flag I must said that snorist regime would never have agreed on pagan symbol on its dominated state. In my opinion they would be much more in favor to exposed the Jagiellon’s double cross or even made it look like orthodox one (of course it would be permanent lay as most of Lithuanians farmers and small town people were (is) pagans and most of Christianized ones, mostly nobles were (is) Catholics during the venedysation). As far as I’m concern the snorist Lithuania flag could looks like simplificeted version of present with very exposed cross or even only a shield with a cross.Follow by white rabbit 11:55, 11 August 2007 (PDT)
- You may be right about the Snorist flag with Cross of Jogaila (or Cross of Jogaila with a longer lower arm, something in between Cross of Jogaila and Orthodox cross as seen in Snor). I believe it would not include Vytis however as Snorists would have promoted the Lithuanian Grand Duchy to be primarilly Slavic rather than Lithuanian and supposedly ruled by Slavs before venedisation and Lithuanian national revival (in real world 19th century such opinions were used to promote russification of Lithuanians) therefore the LGD symbol would not be used for flag of Lithuania. I am not sure about blue/white colors however as they don't seem to have to do much either with Snor or Lithuania. Probably the colors of the Samogitian flag (black/red/white) would be preffered (telling that supposedly modern Lithuanians descended from Samogitia rather than whole LGD or Lithuania and in addition being close to the Snorist black/orange/white colors). I will draw some proposals when I will be at home (after several weeks). In general it could be something like black background, white center with red Cross of Jogaila (probably with longer lower arm). Red border or eagle or Samogitian bear may also be considered elements.
- Regarding religion I think in a copuple of years and incomplete Act of Return not much would have been seriously implemented but I think eventually orthodoxisation of Lithuanians might have been planned, for example by establishing "Western Rite Orthodox" chuch (something similar to Uniates/Eastern Rite Catholics) that recognises Moscow Patriarch rather than the Pope as its leader (and forcefully converting whole Catholic parishes, repressing unloyal priests) later doing missionary work among pagans, financially supporting the Orthodox church and not the pagans. Abdul-aziz 07:23, 12 August 2007 (PDT)
Some possible designs for the flag of Snorist Lithuania. The altered Cross of Jogaila is probably a better symbol than a Samogitian bear (from the historical standpoint rather than aestethic - the altered Cross of Jogaila being more Snorist and the bear perhaps would have been left for the symbol sof the Samogitian Governorate). Various exact measurements (i.e. size of the border, cross, etc.) could be altered. I would probably prefer the 4th one myself it being also similar to the Russian flag of the time. Abdul-aziz 16:14, 22 August 2007 (PDT)
: For me number four is the best in reflecting Snorist period in Lithuania.--Pedromoderno 17:00, 22 August 2007 (PDT)
- Another proposal for the snorist flag
--Marc Pasquin 22:52, 22 August 2007 (PDT)
- Wow, hard to choose. As far as I'm concerned, #4 would be a definite no-no. Why? Because the flag is simply too Russian. Even if in the philosophy of the SNOR the Lithuanians are Slavs, that still doesn't make them Russians. I think a purely Russian flag with a Lithuanian symbol is inappropriate. From Augustinas' proposals, I like #2 best - also because I think it would be nice to have an exception to the stylised-à-la-SNOR flags we're having virtually everywhere already.
- As for Marc's two proposals, I both like them. If we wouldn't use them for Lithuania, I'm sure we could find another destination for them! —IJzeren Jan Uszkiełtu? 03:55, 23 August 2007 (PDT)
czech orthodox church in lithuania
thinking lately about jan hus and being inspired by the misterxeight's question, i came to an idea of czech orthodox church, with the pivotal saint to be st. boleslaus (sw. boleslaw), brother of st. wenceslaus. boleslaus killed his brother, because in a political fight he stood on the side of czech aristocracy and principality against wenceslaus and his loyalty to henry the fowler, king of east francia. when czechs started to become ethnical minority in bohemia during the end of 17cc and through the 18 cc, they drifted away from anything connecting them to bohemians, czech are relative radical because they feel to be fatally threatened. when majority of them emigrated to volhynia and to qazaqstan in the very beginning of 19cc, they brought with them roman catholicism but locally they settled either with orthodoxy or islam. czech orthodox church expresses its anti-bohemian and generally nationalistic views by canonising wenceslaus' brother boleslav in the second half of 19cc. so then, there was rather swatoboleslawskaa orlice (eagle of st. bolesaus) as the nationalistic organisation during GW1 (burning black eagle of silver was the premyslid CoA) and swatoboleslawskaa legie (legion of st. boleslaus) during GW2. Jan II. 23:02, 19 October 2016 (PDT)
- I'm not sure if what I'm about to say is in fact what you are suggesting, but I think that at first the Czechs would have remained part of the Common Bohemian/Hussite Church. (We know that Hus, despite being heavily Bohemicised, did apparently write in Czech, and introduced the diacritic system that Czechs seem to have used up until Josef Jungmann came along.) My guess is that they would have returned to Latin-Rite Roman Catholicism in the 18th century, as they felt threatened by the expansion of Bohemians, and increasingly began to associate the Hussite Church with them. Eventually, most Czechs turn Catholic. I don't think they would have turned Orthodox until the mid-to-late 19th century, when Slavic nationalist movements would have become more powerful in the Erdeka. In addition, I think Slavic nationalism would have prevented any Czechs from becoming Islamic, though it's certainly an interesting course of action. Juanmartinvelezlinares 11:35, 20 October 2016 (PDT)
If I could add my expertise in here, I'd say let's take a look at our world's Orthodox Church of the Czech Lands and Slovakia, a small, autocephalous Orthodox Church whose boundaries don't go past the borders of the old country of Czechoslovakia, and then work backwards. There were Orthodox really only in Slovakia thanks to the Rusyn people after the followers of Sts. Kyrillos and Methodios were forcibly exiled by the exiles of King Ratislav of Moravia. Then, in the 19th Century, a lot of Uniate converts returned to the Church of their ancestors, which is how the Church as we know it got its start. The Patriarch in Peć helped set them up, and Moscow recognized their autocephaly in 1951, and Constantinople in 1998.
Okay, so, things are going to be a bit different in Ill Bethisad. The Hungarian principality in exile in Slevanija is going to enforce Uniatism on the Rusyns just like in our world. In the 19th Century, perhaps at the influence of pan-slavism, these Rusyns return to the Church, and perhaps taking their cue, Czechs leave either Catholicism or Lutheranism (that's a third option for them to go before Orthodoxy, after regular Catholicism or the Hussite Church) and enter the Orthodox Church with their Ruthenian cousins. This would give the Church a presence in the heartland of Bohemia for the first time since the twin missionary-saints. Conversely, with there being Czechs in Volhynia (under pagan Lithuanian rule), perhaps they convert to Orthodoxy more organically, taking on the culture of their Ukrainian neighbors. So, that would give the Orthodox Church three kinds of Central Europeans: latecomer Czech converts (who need not adopt the Byzantine Rite and could be Western Rite Orthodox), ex-Uniate Rusyns, and Ukrainified Volhynian-Czechs. That's a decent spread. I imagine those in Bohemia and Slevanija could be autonomous under Lithuania, the Czechs in Ukraine by Ukraine, and the ones in Qazaqstan under their own eparch of Moscow.
Now, I do know of at least one Czech convert to Islam from the Ottoman Empire. Perhaps a couple dozen or even a couple hundred of those 75,000 Czechs in Kazakhstan are Muslim through individual conversion to Sufi Sunnism or intermarriage, or even to spite the Russians. Misterxeight 17:44, 20 October 2016 (PDT)
- Sounds reasonable. I don't know about the "spite the Russians" thing though--pretty sure the SNOR was strongly pro-Czech, what with the Pan-Slavic nationalism and all. A more likely route IMO would be conversions in order to fit in with their neighbours. (You don't exactly see many Orthodox Kazakhs around.) Juanmartinvelezlinares 06:25, 21 October 2016 (PDT)
- lutheran czech church as a counterpoint to bohemian church in bohemia proper is an excellent idea. so, after appearance of luther, czechs loosing ground and connection to bohemian majority inclined to protestantism. in fact, either because i was not able to make my point clearly or otherwise, i never thought about conversion of czechs to orthodox in bohemia proper, but rather until they established them-selves in lithuania, in ukrainian environment. there still might co-exist both churches - czech autocephalous orthodox church, which may appear in the second half of 19cc along with the czech national revival, its support from east, denunciation of the common cultural origin with bohemians, and the old protestant one (czech brothers / czesstj bratrzi). similar situation may happen in qazaqstan, small balkan may happen there, some people will individually convert to islam, because of the majority culture, some may remain faithful to protestantism as a family tradition. czechs still living in bohemia will be either loyalists and members of catholics church or protestants, the only visible badge of not-being bohemian, similar to *here* catholic lusatians in protestant saxony and brandenburg. Jan II. 23:27, 23 October 2016 (PDT)