Paganism in the Grand Duchy of Lithuania - Page 2 - Historum

Kotromanic · May 5th, 2012, 01:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mosquito

Legally Jadwiga (Hedwig) of Poland wasnt queen but king. I know its funny but its truth. Her title was "king".

Yes.

It follows then that the union of Lithuania and Poland resulted from a "rare" marriage of a King to a Duke?

Thanks for the grin.

BosnianHistorian · May 5th, 2012, 01:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kotromanic

I chose the username after the Bosnian dynasty, yes. My family name is different.

Some of my ancestors were Bosnian in fact.

Can you suggest sources in English about the early years and establishment of the Kotromanic dynasty?

Thanks.

Stefan Tvrtko I Kotromanic - Stormfront

Prijezda_I

Kotromanic · May 5th, 2012, 01:52 PM

Thank you very much. I see that Wikipedia page was edited in April 2012. There was more information than the last time I had read it.

I have begun to read an English language survey history of Medieval Hungary (Engel) but unfortunately I have not made it to the later 13th century yet. It seems that Kotorman, the legal heir of Prijezda I, rose to authority in a time that influence of the Hungarian state on Bosnia was near a historic minimum.

The information on Dominican order and the Bosnian Bans was interesting. It seems that most English language historians do not sort out carefully when the Bogomil heresy was at its peak. There is a tendency which seems to be unsupported by facts/evidence to link Bogomil past with growth of Islamic adherents in Bosnia.

But... we are now off on what should be its own thread.

BosnianHistorian · May 5th, 2012, 02:29 PM

If you have anything that needs translating which you think looks juicy, ask me.

**Mosquito** · May 5th, 2012, 02:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kotromanic

Yes.

It follows then that the union of Lithuania and Poland resulted from a "rare" marriage of a King to a Duke?

Thanks for the grin.

Thats truth. The king of Poland married the Grand Duke of Lithuania

RollingWave · May 6th, 2012, 07:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dimmit

Interesting. I did not know that about the common people of Russia.

Perhaps Lithuania was able to depend on the Russian princes because their Catholic neighbors to the west probably considered them equally heretical (given the Russians were Orthodox).

Still, it seems amazing to me that a country in that time could hold out for so long being officially pagan. Diplomacy and politics at that time required intermarriage between ruling families of different kingdoms. I would presume that a Lithuanian prince would find it hard to marry his son to a daughter of a neighboring kingdom if that son was raised, and continued to practice, paganism.

Part of it was because umm.. it wasn't a conuntry

.... the Lithuanian didn't really form a state until AFTER the Crusaders started to knock on their doors. before that the Russians basically consider the Balts on the same level that they consider the Chudes (Estonians / Finns / Siberians)

Kotromanic · May 6th, 2012, 08:05 PM

"dragged kicking and screaming into the medieval political order" or something like that, in the American idiom. Essentially.

There are many many more sources in English about the Poles or Teutonic Knights in that era relative to the history from the side of Baltic people.

Nonetheless the Lithuanians were the most important military power in the battle which humbled Teutonic Knights for the longer term.

RollingWave · May 7th, 2012, 01:07 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kotromanic

"dragged kicking and screaming into the medieval political order" or something like that, in the American idiom. Essentially.

There are many many more sources in English about the Poles or Teutonic Knights in that era relative to the history from the side of Baltic people.

Nonetheless the Lithuanians were the most important military power in the battle which humbled Teutonic Knights for the longer term.

Well, again, part of that was because the Baltic people never had a unified government to begin with, so the odds of them having a decent written record was pretty terrible as well. it was only after the Grand Duchy was established that this begin to change.

As for the final statement.... I think the Poles would have something to say about that

in Tannerberg it seems that the Poles did the heaviest fighting though the Lithuanian / Tatars luring the Teutons to break formation was a decisive factor.

**Mosquito** · May 7th, 2012, 09:16 AM

Lithuanians didnt have knights or heavy cavalry, most of them were rather lightly armed and armoured cavalry and infantry, so they were not able to stand alone on the battlefield against the European knights. Technologically they were bow, horse, wooden club and leather armour army.

If someone wants here is full movie Teutonic Knights with English subs:

Knights of Teutonic Order, whole movie, english subtitles - YouTube

Kotromanic · May 7th, 2012, 02:49 PM

While the Poles were technologically superior at Grunwald the Lithuanians' morale had to have been important to that outcome. It seems to have been a golden opportunity for revenge after seven or more generations of repression.

Even speaking as someone with more than five years working as an engineer for military hardware...the technology in most ages is not worth half of the determining factors of war. In spite of a fifty to eighty year technology gap America had in recent wars, David Petraeus' tactical breakthrough in Iraq was to pay soldiers on the other side to stop collaborating with global terror networks, for instance. Iron swords over bronze swords certainly would be an exception to that rule, though.