Litvinism

Rally in Minsk on 19 September 1991, one of the posters has the inscription: "Return to the people its old symbols: the coat of arms of Pahonia and the white-red-white flag, as well as the name of the country – Litva, the capital – Minsk!"

Litvinism (Belarusian : Літвінізм, romanized: Litvinizm) is a term used to describe a current within Belarusian nationalism and historiography that emphasizes the Grand Duchy of Lithuania as a foundational component of Belarusian statehood and identity. Proponents argue that the GDL was a dual Baltic–Slavic state in which the Ruthenians played a central cultural and political role, citing the use of the Old Belarusian language in state administration and the Statutes of Lithuania. ^[1]

The term "Litvinism" itself is rarely used as a self-identifier by proponents of these views. Instead, it is frequently employed by critics, mainly in Lithuania and Russia, as a derogatory label to characterize a wide spectrum of Belarusian historical narratives as revisionist or pseudohistorical. Adherents to these views generally identify simply as Belarusians reclaiming their lost heritage, or as Litvins (the historical demonym of the Grand Duchy), viewing the GDL not as a foreign conqueror but as their own historical state. ^[2]

The movement encompasses a spectrum of interpretations. Moderate strands view the Grand Duchy as a shared Baltic-Slavic heritage, a view that has gained some acceptance in Western academia. ^[3] However, radical fringes of this movement challenge the Baltic origins of the state entirely, claiming that medieval "Litvins" were exclusively Slavic and that modern Lithuanians are descendants of Samogitians (Žhmud) unrelated to the historical "Litva." These radical interpretations are widely rejected by mainstream historians in Lithuania and the West. ^[4]

Assertions that the Grand Duchy of Lithuania was a Belarusian state have appeared in the writings of interwar Belarusian activists and literators, ^[5] Soviet-era Belarusian communists, ^[6] and modern opposition leaders, who often use the narrative to distinguish Belarus from the "Russian World." ^[7] Conversely, the Government of Lithuania views the radical strands of this ideology as a potential threat to territorial integrity and historical identity. ^[8]

Reasoning

Proponents of this view, ranging from Belarusian romantic nationalists to academic historians, base their views on the premise that the Grand Duchy of Lithuania was primarily a Slavic, rather than Baltic, state. The arguments rely on several key historical and linguistic points:

Epitome of the Second Statute of Lithuania in Latin (1576), claiming that the Lithuanians are of Italian origin

• The Demographic Argument: Adherents to this view argue that the vast majority of the GDL's territory and population was Slavic (ancestors of modern Belarusians and Ukrainians), while the Baltic tribes (ancestors of modern Lithuanians) constituted a small minority. They contend that the sheer weight of the Slavic majority inevitably defined the state's culture and politics. ^[9]
• The Status of Samogitia: A key argument rests on the historical distinction of Duchy of Samogitia today's (Žemaitija), which covers roughly 40% of modern Lithuania. Proponents point out that Samogitia was often referred to as a separate entity in official documents, maps, and royal titles (e.g., "Grand Duke of Lithuania, Ruthenia, Prussia, Samogitia..."). Unlike the rest of the state, which was divided into Voivodeships, Samogitia retained a unique autonomous status as the Duchy of Samogitia (or Eldership). This separation can be interpreted as evidence that "Lithuania" proper was the Slavic/Ruthenian core, distinct from the Baltic "Samogitia." ^[10] However, in the 15th century Lithuanian Grand Duke Vytautas the Great's 11 March 1420 letter to Sigismund, Holy Roman Emperor, it was written that Samogitia is the same land of Lithuania and that Lithuanians in Aukštaitija and Samogitians (who also call themselves only as Lithuanians) are the same people with one language. ^{[11] [12]}
• The Linguistic Argument: Supporters cite the fact that Old Belarusian (Chancery Slavonic) was the official language of the GDL's administration, law (the Statutes of Lithuania), and diplomacy. Historian Jan Lyalevich cites medieval Muscovite sources that referred to the Old Belarusian language as the "Lithuanian language," suggesting a historical synonymy between "Litvin" and the Slavic population. ^[13] Similarly, Polish linguist Aleksander Brückner noted that 16th-century writer Mikołaj Rej described Rusyns as speaking "Lithuanian," which Brückner interpreted as meaning Belarusian, stating "Litvin was always only Belarusian for him, never Ukrainian." ^[14] Proponents also point to 19th-century figures like the poet Władysław Syrokomla, who titled himself "Litwin" despite writing primarily in Polish. Syrokomla famously described his inability to communicate with a Baltic-speaking villager near Kernavė, noting: "I, a Lithuanian [Litwin] on purely Lithuanian soil, couldn't talk to a Lithuanian!" ^[15] This anecdote is frequently cited to argue that the historical "Litvin" identity was a political or cultural designation accessible to Slavs, distinct from the Baltic ethno-linguistic group. Lithuanian historian Artūras Dubonis deny the status of the Ruthenian language as the state language of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania and highlighted the significance and usage of the Lithuanian language at the courts of the Gediminid–Jagiellonian monarchs of Lithuania. ^[16] Even at the royal courts in Vilnius of Sigismund II Augustus, the last Grand Duke of Lithuania prior to the Union of Lublin, both Polish and Lithuanian were spoken equally widely. ^[17]
• The "Litva" vs. "Lietuva" Distinction: A central tenet of the radical interpretation is the linguistic distinction between the historical term "Litva" (associated with the Slavic heritage of the Grand Duchy) and the modern term "Lietuva" or "Letuva" (associated with the modern Republic of Lithuania). Some argue that modern Lithuanians are descendants of the Samogitians and have appropriated the name "Lithuania" illegitimately, while Belarusians are the true historical "Litvins." ^{[18] [19]} The attempts to separate the Lithuanian form of the name of Lithuania "Lietuva" from Slavic languages term "Litva" was criticized by Belarusian scientists Vincuk Viačorka and Sergei Šupa  [ be ]. ^[20]
• Novogrudok as the first capital: Following the theories of Mikola Yermalovich, some researchers claim that the first capital of the Grand Duchy was the Belarusian city of Novogrudok, where the coronation of King Mindaugas allegedly took place. ^{[21] [22] [23]} This challenges the mainstream view that the state's core was in the Baltic lands of Aukštaitija. The status of Novogrudok as the first capital of Lithuania was criticized by Lithuanian historian Artūras Dubonis and he described it as parasitic myth in Belarusian historiography. ^[24] Moreover, in the early 17th-century Radziwiłł map Kernavė is marked as "Kiernow primum M. Duci Lith. domicilium" (English: Kernavė, the first residence-capital of the Grand Dukes of Lithuania). ^[25]

History

Osip Senkovsky, proposed in the 19th c. that originis of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania were Slavic

According to the Lithuanian author Tomas Baranauskas, who claims to have coined the term, ^[8] Litvinism is the synthesis of two distinct historiographical traditions: the Tsarist Russian view, which asserted that the Grand Duchy of Lithuania was a Russian state, and the interwar Polish view that regarded the Polish population of eastern Lithuania proper as actual Lithuanians ( Litwini ), in contrast to the Lietuvisy of the Republic of Lithuania. ^[8]

Baranauskas traces the origins of Litvinism to the period following the partitions of the Polish–Lithuanian Commonwealth, when the Russian Empire sought to reshape the old Lithuanian identity in ways that would better serve imperial interests. ^[21] Osip Senkovsky, a professor at St. Petersburg University originally from the Vilnius Region, collaborated with the Tsarist administration and advanced the theory that the origins of the Lithuanian state were Slavic, claiming it had been founded by Ruthenians who supposedly migrated westward due to Mongol invasions. ^{[21] [26]} Furthermore, his contemporary, the Polish-speaking pseudo-historian, poet Ignacy Kołakowski  [ pl ] ^[a] propagated the thesis that Lithuania was Slavic before the creation of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania. ^[21]

Official historical science and the ideology of the Russian Empire in the 19th and early 20th centuries, in order to justify (legitimize) the possession of the lands of the former Grand Duchy of Lithuania (the so-called "Northwestern provinces"), sought to maximize and overemphasize the role of the "Russian/Ruthenian" population (In the Russian language, the terms “Russian” and “Ruthenian” are denoted by the same word, which creates confusion that is convenient for the Russian authorities) and Orthodoxy in the process of formation, character, and history of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania. Russian historians (Nikolai Dashkevich, Fedor Leontovich, Volodymyr Antonovych, Matvei Lyubavsky, Ivan Lappo, Aleksandr Presnyakov, and others) designated the state in their works with the neologism "Lithuanian-Ruthenian State" or "Lithuanian-Ruthenian Principality". ^{[27] [28]}

From the early 20th century, ideologues of the Belarusian national-democratic and socialist movements, many of whom became historians, were shaped largely by the educational background of Russian universities and thus the propaganda contained within the Russian historiographical tradition. For example, Mitrofan Dovnar-Zapolsky was a student of Volodymyr Antonovych, and Uladzimir Picheta was a student of Matvei Lyubavsky. ^[29] While Vaclaŭ Lastoŭski in his essay "Short History of Belarus" (1910) calls the Grand Duchy of Lithuania the "Lithuanian-Ruthenian State" in the vein of the Russian tradition (only occasionally using definitions like "Lithuanian-Belarusian boyars, ambassadors"), figures of the Belarusian national-democratic and socialist movements soon began to use a new term—"Lithuanian-Belarusian Principality". For example, Yanka Kupala in his article "Do we have the right to renounce our native language?"'(newspaper Nasha Niva , No. 15, 1914) uses the term "Lithuanian-Belarusian Principality" to designate the medieval Grand Duchy of Lithuania. ^[30] In 1919, historians Mitrofan Dovnar-Zapolsky ("Foundations of the Statehood of Belarus", 1919), Usievalad Ihnatoŭski ("Short Essays on the History of Belarus", 1919), and Aliaksandr Ćvikievič ("Belarus. Political Essay", 1919) published their landmark works using the terms "Lithuanian-Belarusian Principality", "Lithuanian-Belarusian State", and "Grand Duchy of Lithuania-Belarus". ^{[29] [31]} In 1919, in the newspaper Belarus (No. 33, 1919), Yanka Kupala published his article "Independence", where he twice uses the term "Grand Lithuanian-Belarusian Principality" regarding the medieval Grand Duchy of Lithuania. ^[32]

After the First World War, Józef Piłsudski's plans to restore Poland-Lithuania were shattered by Lithuanian desires for an independent state, manifested in an independent Lithuanian republic. ^[21] For propaganda purposes, theories about how the inhabitants of the Republic of Lithuania are lietuvisai, who were unrelated to the "right" and "historical" Lithuanians, the Litvins, appeared. ^[21] The Polish historian Feliks Koneczny used the terms letuwskije, Letuwa and letuwini to describe the "fake Lithuanians" in his book Polska między Wschodem i Zachodem, 'Poland between East and West', and other works. ^[21] He also wrote about how Vilnius should belong to the Litvins and thus be a Polish-owned city, instead of a lietuvisai one. ^[21]

Map of Lithuania proper according to Yermalovich

The dissolution of the Soviet Union led to these ideas being taken over by some Belarusian nationalists seeking a national identity. ^[21] The amateur Belarusian historian Mikola Yermalovich stated that Lithuania began in the territory between Novogrudok and Minsk, i.e. in modern Belarusian lands, which allegedly occupied parts of modern Lithuania. ^[21] M. Yermalovich considers Samogitia as the country's sole Baltic territory, while Aukštaitija is an artificially conceived ethnographic region occupying a part of the Belarusian lands. ^[21] Litvinism's theories were developed even earlier by Paviel Urban  [ be ] in the Belarusian diaspora, who presented his pseudo-scientific theories in his writings "On the National Nature of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania and Historical Term of Lithuania" (1964), "In the Light of Historical Facts" (1972), "Ethnic belongings of Ancient Litvins" (1994) and "Ancient Litvins. Language, origin, ethnicity". ^[21] By the end of the 20th century, there were more disseminators of Litvinism's ideas: Vitovt Charopko popularized the concept of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania being a Belarusian state with Belarusian leaders, while Alexander Kravtsevich tried proving that the Lithuanian state's old capital and that the city where King Mindaugas had been crowned was Novogrudok, Belarus. ^[21]

Assessment

In Belarus

The 1695 map Estats De La Couronne De Pologne by Alexis-Hubert Jaillot. The map depicts the boundaries of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania as roughly corresponding to present-day Belarus, while a significant portion of modern Lithuania falls within the Duchy of Samogitia.

he use of Letuva as a Belarusian term for modern Lithuania has been criticized within Belarus as inappropriate, particularly in light of an early-1990s agreement among Belarusian and Lithuanian intellectuals to avoid the terms Летува and летувісы in publications. ^[20] Belarusian opposition leader Sviatlana Tsikhanouskaya has described Litvinism as a marginal phenomenon aimed at provoking discord between Belarusians and Lithuanians, emphasizing Belarusian respect for Lithuania’s territorial integrity and heritage. ^{[7] [33]} Some analysts have characterized Litvinism as a form of nationalism with expansionist features. ^[34] In 2024, more than a dozen Belarusian organizations in Lithuania issued a declaration distancing themselves from Litvinism and rejecting any territorial claims toward Lithuania. ^[35]

Within Belarus and its diaspora, a segment of the population adheres to the historical interpretation known as Litvinism, which posits that the Grand Duchy of Lithuania was fundamentally a Belarusian polity. Proponents of this view emphasize the connection between modern Belarusian identity and the medieval state as a means of expressing a pre-Russian cultural heritage. ^[36] While Litvinism does not have a dominant influence on mainstream Belarusian politics, its supporters are active in cultural and educational spheres. The ideology has been at times both tolerated and opposed by the Government of Belarus, ^[37] and has found traction among parts of the Belarusian opposition. Proponents argue that the historical Lithuania referred either to the entire Grand Duchy or exclusively to Belarusian territories, distinct from the Baltic region of Samogitia. This view holds until the partitions of 1795 and the subsequent annexation by the Russian Empire. ^[38] These authors claim that Belarusian lands formed the core of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania. ^[38] Conversely, some Belarusian commentators criticize Litvinism, viewing it as a potential form of national separatism. ^[39]

Territory claimed by the Belarusian Democratic Republic in 1918.

On 20 February 1918, the Rada of the Belarusian Democratic Republic formed a government, announcing the Belarusian Democratic Republic on 9 March, and declaring independence on 25 March. These acts were largely symbolic due to restrictions imposed by the Bolsheviks, Germans, and later Polish forces. ^[40] The Republic of Lithuania was among the first to recognize the independence of the Belarusian Democratic Republic in 1918. Following the Red Army's advance in December 1918, the Belarusian government in exile relocated to Kaunas, the temporary capital of Lithuania, with Jazep Varonka serving as the minister for Belarusian Affairs. ^[41] Agreements were made to attach Grodno to Lithuania and form Belarusian military units there, such as the 1st Belarusian Regiment. ^[41] In November 1920, the two governments signed mutual recognition treaties. ^[42] During the Genoa Conference in 1922, Belarusian representatives Vaclau Lastouski and Alaksandar Ćvikievič recognized Lithuania's rights to the Vilnius Region. This decision faced opposition from other members of the Belarusian Rada, leading to Lastouski's resignation. ^[42] By November 1923, the Rada's leadership relocated to Prague as relations with the Lithuanian government deteriorated. ^[42] In October 1926, Vaclau Lastouski presented a concept to the Soviet Embassy in Kaunas, arguing that modern Lithuanians were effectively Samogitians using the "foreign passport" of the historical Lithuanian state. ^[43]

Polish historian Daniel Boćkowski  [ pl ] notes that in 1919, Arkadź Smolič, the Belarusian Minister of Education, wrote that if the Bolsheviks were to restore "real borders" creating a united Belarus (including Vilnius, Białystok, and Gomel), Belarusians should support such an order, despite acknowledging the potential harm of Bolshevik rule. ^[44]

According to Belarusian historian Hienadź Sahanovič, in the early years of the Byelorussian Soviet Socialist Republic, national-minded Belarusians often supported the view that the Grand Duchy of Lithuania was their historical state, viewing the incorporation of Belarusian territories as voluntary. This perspective, which treated Russia as foreign, led to repressions against these figures. ^[45] Sahanovič notes a shift in the 1930s and 1940s, where Soviet historiography began to present Russia positively while characterizing the Grand Duchy of Lithuania as "predatory" and alien to Belarusian statehood. ^[45]

In 1938, Belarusian historian and political figure Mikalaj Škialionak  [ be ] published an article arguing that the Kingdom of Lithuania under Mindaugas was essentially Belarusian from its inception. He claimed it consisted of lands like Novogrudok, Grodno, Slonim, and Vawkavysk, with Baltic regions like Aukštaitija and Samogitia being later additions. Other Belarusian territories, such as the Principalities of Polotsk, Turov, Minsk, and Vitebsk, were said to have joined voluntarily. ^[22]

In the early 1960s, Paval Urban  [ be ], a historian of the Belarusian diaspora, argued that the Grand Duchy of Lithuania was fundamentally a Slavic–Belarusian state, rejecting Soviet interpretations. ^[46] In his 1972 book In the Light of Historical Facts, Urban equated historical Lithuania and Litvins with Western Baltic Slavs. ^[47]

These theories were further developed in the late 20th century by Mikola Yermalovich, who challenged the Baltic origin of the Grand Duchy. ^[48] Historian Alexander Kravtsevich  [ be ] posited that the Grand Duchy was a "Baltic–Eastern Slavic state" where Slavs dominated, leading to the formation of a Belarusian ethnic group. ^[48] Kravtsevich argued that the name "Lithuania" was appropriated by Samogitians during the Lithuanian National Revival and applied to the modern Republic of Lithuania in 1918. ^[49]

In 1990, following the adoption of the Act of the Re-Establishment of the State of Lithuania by the Supreme Council – Reconstituent Seimas, the Presidium of the Supreme Soviet of the Byelorussian Soviet Socialist Republic on 29 March 1990 adopted an official statement, signed by chairman Nikolai Dementey, which claimed that upon the withdrawal of the Lithuanian SSR from the Union with the Byelorussian SSR, the Byelorussian SSR will not consider itself bound by all laws, decrees and other acts regarding the transfer of part of the Belarusian lands to Lithuania. ^[6] On 24 October 1991 Vytautas Landsbergis and Stanislav Shushkevich in Vilnius signed a declaration regarding the principles of good neighborly relations between the Republic of Lithuania and the Republic of Belarus. ^[50] However, in 1992 Piatro Kravchanka, the Minister of Foreign Affairs of Belarus, told the Reuters correspondent that the Vilnius Region should belong to Belarus (the ministry later apologized for these words), while Zianon Pazniak, the founder and leader of the Belarusian Popular Front, spoke about possible Belarusian claims to the territories of the Republic of Lithuania during his visit to the Supreme Council of the Republic of Lithuania in Vilnius. ^{[50] [51]} Moreover, in the early 1990s, Belarusian mass media (e.g. Sovetskaya Belorussiya on 25 August 1990, Nasha Niva in 1992) considered the issue of the transfer of Vilnius to Belarus or granting an independent city status to Vilnius, while an assembly named Slavic Sobor on 20 February 1992 adopted a statement that Belarus had legal and historical rights to inherit the Vilnius Region. ^[52] In June 2024, Viktoras Baublys, the first Lithuanian ambassador to independent Belarus, recalled that in the early 1990s the narratives that the heritage and history of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania were mostly Belarusian were very popular among Belarusian cultural representatives and oppositionists to Lukashenko. ^[53] According to Justas Vincas Paleckis, the former adviser for foreign affairs of Lithuanian President Algirdas Brazauskas, Stanislav Shushkevich, the first head of state of independent Belarus, publicly demonstrated in the early 1990s that he do not recognize the Belarus–Lithuania border when during his visit to Lithuania he refused to be welcomed near the border (which was common at the time). ^[54] Consequently, the agreement between the Republic of Lithuania and the Republic of Belarus on good neighborliness and cooperation was signed only on 6 February 1995. ^{[55] [52]}

When Alexander Lukashenko was elected president in 1994, he altered government historiography to be closer to Soviet historiography, claiming that the Grand Duchy of Lithuania was a Lithuanian state while Belarus was created during the Russian Revolution. This marked a change from the Belarusian position before 1994, which regarded the Grand Duchy as jointly Belarusian and Lithuanian. In 2005, the state narrative returned to this position. According to Lithuanian historian Rūstis Kamuntavičius, this could have possibly been caused by a rapproachment between Lukashenko and the opposition or an effort by the former to distance Belarus from Russia. After the 2020–2021 Belarusian protests, Lukashenko began persecuting historians and changed textbooks and university curricula to remove references to Belarusian involvement in the Grand Duchy. ^[56]

The Belarusian regime does not follow a coherent historical narrative and juggles conflicting facts to pursue unclear goals. Kamuntavičius states that "There is complete chaos. They write textbooks for schools, and before publishing, they rewrite them in a different way. History is taught according to one logic in the earlier grades, and according to another logic in the older grades." and argues that "Belarusian authorities don't have the intellectual capacity to control the narrative." ^[56]

On 20 May 2000, a group of mostly Belarusian Litvinists in Novogrudok signed the Act of Proclamation of the Litvin nation, while its members consider that in 1900-1922 the Old Lithuania died and the name "Lithuanians" was assigned to the Samogitians. ^[57] Subsequently, the leaders of the Congress of the Litvin League ("Ліцвінскай лігі, Licvinskaj lihi") and the authors of the Act of Proclamation of the Litvin nation were arrested in Poland as agents of Federal Security Service. ^[39]

In February 2005, Viačaslaŭ Rakicki  [ be ], a Belarusian writer and journalist, publicly discussed with Alieh Trusaŭ  [ be ], a Belarusian archaeologist and publicist, and mutually agreed that the "ancient Belarusian state" – Grand Duchy of Lithuania had two colonies: the Duchy of Livonia and the Duchy of Courland and Semigallia (both of which were primarily presented as the former "Belarusian colonies" near the Baltic Sea). ^[58] According to Trusaŭ, the Belarusian nation and the Grand Duchy of Lithuania were created from East Slavs, ^[59] thus the Grand Duchy of Lithuania since the Middle Ages was a predominantly Belarusian state with Lithuanian ("[літоўскія] / litoŭskija") and Ukrainian elements. ^[60]

Following his departure from Belarus in fear of repressions, Belarusian nationalist Zianon Pazniak complained in the June 2004 edition of the newsletter Belarusian News  [ be ] that Belarus was a victorious state in World War II, but instead of territorial gains like other victorious states it "lost its territories and even its historical capital". ^[61] In February 2005, Arłou expressed his agreement to such Pazniak's statements about World War II. ^[61] In 2005, Pazniak wrote that the task of the Belarusian intelligentsia, education, educational and national literature is to "return the historical consciousness of the people to their native home – to the Grand Duchy of Lithuania" and in the next stage "return the official name of the state" which according to him should be named in the Constitution of Belarus as the Grand Duchy of Lithuanian Belarus (Belarusian : Вялікае Княства Літоўскае Беларусь) and abbreviated as Belarus to solve political and historical-ethnic questions. ^[62] Pazniak's suggestion to change the name of Belarus to the Grand Duchy of Lithuanian Belarus received only partial support among the Belarusians and also was criticized. ^[63] According to Pazniak, the Belarusian language, culture and other attributes were destroyed by the Russian occupation policy (tsarist and communist), which instead tried to tie the historical consciousness of Belarusians to the history of Russia, while Lukashenko's government is a "pro-Muscovite regime". ^[62] The 2019 census demonstrated that the Belarusian language is perceived as a native language of Belarus by ~60% of its population, however only ~25% use it in their everyday life. ^[64]

Belarusian public figures Voĺha Ipatava (left) and Alexander Kravtsevich (right), both expressed their support for claims that the Grand Duchy of Lithuania "arose in Belarusian lands" and that Belarus is its "main successor" ^[23]

On January 22, 2009, a public organizing committee Lithuania Millennium was formed to commemorate the first mentioning of the name of Lithuania in written sources in 1009 (its chairman was professor Anatol Hrytskievich and it also included: writer Voĺha Ipatava  [ be ], historian Alexander Kravtsevich, professor Alieś Astroŭski  [ be ], biologist Aliaksiej Mikulič  [ be ], archeologist Edvard Zajkoŭski  [ be ], painter Aliaksiej Maračkin  [ be ], priest Lieanid Akalovič, writer Zdzislaŭ Sićka  [ be ]). ^[23] According to members of the committee Lithuania Millennium, the name of Lithuania refers to the ancient territory of Belarus because the Grand Duchy of Lithuania "arose in our [Belarusian] lands" and its first capital was in Novogrudok, while the current Belarusians called themselves Lithuanians ("літвінамі [Litvinami]") until the beginning of the 20th century, thus Belarus is the "main successor" of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania. ^[23]

In September 2009, Belsat TV published a video where Belarusian historians, including Hienadź Sahanovič and Alexander Kravtsevich, narrated that under the reign of Grand Duke Vytautas the "Belarusian state" became the largest in Europe. ^[65]

In October 2009, Vadim Deruzhinskiy and Anatoĺ Taras  [ be ] (scientific editor) published a 560 pages book Secrets of Belarusian History (Тайны белорусской истории) where in its preface it was stated that the Belarusians were previously called Litvins and Belarus did not exist in the Middle Ages, however instead there was Lithuania to which the Republic of Lithuania ("Республика Летува [Respublyka Letuva]") has no relation because in ~1220 Lithuania appeared in Western Belarus due to the migration of Polabian Slavs. ^[66]

On 23 April 2017, it was stated in the official website of the Rada of the Belarusian Democratic Republic that the Grand Duchy of Lithuania was always considered as the previous embodiment of Belarusian statehood by the leadership of the Belarusian Democratic Republic. ^[67]

Zianon Pazniak, who claims that historical "Litva" is Belarus, while "Letuva" is historical Samogitia

In September 2015, Zianon Pazniak claimed that the Russian propaganda is trying to use some "Belarusian marginals" who dream about the revival of Greater Lithuania. ^[69] Later, in December 2016, Pazniak stated that "the state was called Grand Duchy of Lithuania (now Belarus), Ruthenia (now Ukraine) and Samogitia (now Letuva)" and that "fantastic history of Letuva is based on a twisted real history of Belarus (historical Litva)". ^[68] However, according to Pazniak the agenda of "returning to the name Літва [Litva]" would be fruitless for Belarus because it is 150 years too late and a new Belarusian nation was created over this time. ^[68] Nevertheless, by describing etymological terms, he continued to claim that the Grand Duchy of Lithuania (Belarusian : Вялікае Княства Літоўскае) corresponds to today's Belarus (according to him, the term was also favorable for the Russian Empire for Russification purposes, but was later banned by the Governing Senate in 1840 and the Belarusians were then treated as a "branch of the Russian tribe"), while the current Lithuania is Samogitia (Belarusian : Жамойцкае), and that in the 17th century the Belarusian language was noted in Muscovy as "Litvinskaya" (Belarusian : ліцьвінскай), "Lithuanian" (Belarusian : літоўскай), "Lithuanian writing" (Belarusian : літоўскае пісьмо). ^[68] Also, according to Pazniak, due to struggle in the Belarusian–Russian relations during the national revival in the 19th century, the Samogitians (Belarusian : Жамойць), who according to him allegedly did not even have their own writing system, benefited by choosing the name "Літва [Litva]" and built a fantastic state ideology. ^[68]

The differences in Wikipedia's articles illustrate different Belarusian points of view to history. Article about Lithuanians in the Belarusian Classical Orthography Wikipedia describe them as "Letuvisy" [Летувісы) and historically as "Žamojty" (жамойты) (Samogitians), while the more popular Belarusian Wikipedia describe them primarily as "Litoŭcy" (Літоўцы) and secondary as "Letuvisy" (Летувісы), but without historically completely equating them to the Samogitians.

In recent times, open declarations have been published in Belarus, stating that Vilnius is a "non-Lithuanian" city and should supposedly belong to the "historical Lithuanians" – Belarusians. ^[70] For example, since 2013, during annual Zapad (English: West) exercises in which the Russian Armed Forces and Armed Forces of Belarus jointly participate, the narrative that the Vilnius Region should supposedly belong to Belarus is openly repeated. ^[71] In 2018, Alexander Lukashenko stated during an interview with the Echo of Moscow that "we are not the heirs of Kievan Rus', we are the heirs of Vilnius". ^{[72] [12] [73]} Russian right-wing politician Vladimir Zhirinovsky also publicly called on Belarusians to "take back" Vilnius. ^[74]

On 1 March 2021, Belsat TV published a program in which Alexander Kravtsevich, a Belarusian professor, Doctor of History, argued that Vilnius was founded, built and named by the Belarusians and that history does not know cities built by Lithuanians. ^[75] According to Alvydas Nikžentaitis, the director of Lithuanian Institute of History, this theory is not new, but has been known for a long time and has its fans and followers in Belarus; however, even some Belarusian historians regard Alexander Kravtsevich as a radical and refuse to cooperate with him. ^[75] Nevertheless, Belsat TV actively promotes the Litvinist narrative in various programs it shows: movies, discussions of historians and scientists in the TV studio, and the main narrator of the Litvinist movies is Litvinism propagator Alexander Kravtsevich. ^{[76] [77] [78]} Belsat TV show where historians gather and promote Litvinism is called Intermarium , which is named after Józef Piłsudski's post-World War I geopolitical plan of a future federal state in Central and Eastern Europe dominated by Poland. ^{[76] [79] [80]} Since June 2022 Belsat TV is being broadcast in Belarusian and Russian languages in Southeastern Lithuania. ^[81] On 19 November 2022, Belsat published an article where it was stated that Vilnius is "our lost capital" of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania. ^[82] In October 2023, Belsat TV published a show during which the events of Żeligowski's Mutiny were justified when, according to the host of this show, Vilnius was captured by the Lithuanians–Belarusians, led by general Lucjan Żeligowski, who until his death "hated three things: the Bolsheviks, Germans and Lithuanians" and was separating Litvins from Lithuanians. ^[83]

Moreover, Alexander Kravtsevich also seeks to segregate the terms "Lietuviai" (a word in the Lithuanian language meaning Lithuanians, but according to Kravtsevich "Lietuviai" were Catholic Samogitians (жамойты) in the Grand Duchy of Lithuania), "Lietuva" (a word in the Lithuanian language meaning Lithuania) from "Litovcy" (a word in some Slavic languages, including Belarusian, meaning Lithuanians), "Litva" (a word in the Slavic languages, including Belarusian, meaning Lithuania) and accuses Lithuanians (Lietuviai) that they assigned the whole history of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania for themselves after proclaiming the restoration of an independent State of Lithuania in 1918 and maintaining it. ^[84] According to Kravtsevich, the usage of the words "Litva" (Літва), "Lićviny" (ліцьвіны) when describing a historical country and "Letuva" (Летува), "Letuvisy" (летувісы) when describing a modern country is "completely justified and even necessary", because according to him, the historical Lithuania was created in the middle of the 13th century in territories which mostly are "ethnically Belarusian" (Grodno Region, Vilnius Region, Novogrudok Region, and western Minsk Region) and the "Letuvisy" (летувісы) made up only a small percentage of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania's population, but during the Soviet period the legacy of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania was attributed to the Lithuanians and now it is almost exclusive to a Baltic state with the endonym of "Letuva". ^[19]

According to Źmicier Sańko  [ be ], a Belarusian linguist and publisher, the ancient history of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania was "changed" by manipulations of the 20th-century dictators and if Joseph Stalin had assigned Vilnius to Belarus, the Grand Duchy of Lithuania would have been "indisputably interpreted as a Belarusian state". ^[85] Sańko also stated that the Lithuanians want to preserve the equality between historical and modern Lithuania, therefore, according to him, there is an urgent requirement to terminologically demarcate historical Lithuania and modern Lithuania. ^[85] Furthermore, according to Sańko, Moscow made two "expensive gifts" to Lithuania when it "gave Vilnius from us [Belarus]" in 1939 and "organized" the 1995 Belarusian referendum to change the national state symbols. ^[85]

"The words "Litva", "Litvin", "Litoŭski" in the Old Belarusian language from the beginning meant the Baltic union of tribes, its representatives and their language. (...) For modern Belarusians, Lithuania is the name of today's neighboring country. (...) Every Belarusian should know that Lithuania is also his ancient country and "childish complexes" about it should be discarded."

— Vincuk Viačorka, Sergei Shupa  [ be ] ^[20]

In February 2020, Vincuk Viačorka and Sergei Šupa  [ be ] together wrote an article arguing that Lithuania should be called "Litva", rather than "Letuva". ^[20] Viačorka and Shupa argued that "Litva" is "our [Belarusian] ancient word" and "Litva" as well as Baltic "Lietuva" are etymological equivalents, while the usage of a word "Letuva" is unacceptable because it contradicts the nature of the Belarusian language and that such an approach was incompetent linguistically. ^[20] Moreover, from the early periods the Old Belarusian language words "Litva", "Litvin", "Litoŭski" described Baltic tribes, their language and representatives, and this approach was continued by the interwar classical orthography tradition linguists (e.g. Valiancina Paškievič  [ be ]). ^[20] According to Viačorka and Šupa, every Belarusian should know that Lithuania is also his ancient country and "childish complexes" about it should be discarded, while the imposition of a word "Letuva" is "monstrous" and instead there is a necessity of historical education. ^[20] Viačorka and Šupa also reminded that in the early 1990s there was an agreement between the Belarusian and Lithuanian intellectuals to stop using the terms "Letuva" and "Letuvísaŭ" [летувíсаў] in Belarusian publications. ^[20]

On 23 April 2020, the official account in Twitter of the Rada of the Belarusian Democratic Republic stated that the political ideal of Belarusians was the revival of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania as a federation of Belarus and Lithuania ("[Летувы [Letuvy]"). ^[86]

In December 2021, Belarusian politician Valery Tsepkalo, one of the denied candidates of the 2020 Belarusian presidential election, stated online that the Grand Duchy of Lithuania was created in the current Belarusian territory in the 13th–14th centuries and later expanded, while the spoken language in the state was the Ruthenian/Russian language ("Russkiy jazyk"), not the current Lithuanian language. ^{[87] [88]}

According to Aleś Čajčyc, the Information Secretary of the Rada of the Belarusian Democratic Republic, ^[89] the Litvinism article on English Wikipedia was written by "Lithuanian marginals". ^[90] However, the same year after secretary's statement the official Twitter account of the exiled government tweeted that the coat of arms is "a symbol of centuries of friendship between Belarusians and Lithuanians". ^[91]

Statues of Lithuanian Grand Dukes Vytautas and Jogaila in the Belarusian National History Museum in Minsk, Belarus which were removed in 2022

In September 2021, Alexander Lukashenko claimed that the Lithuanian capital Vilnius and Polish city Białystok are Belarusian lands. ^[92] In January 2022, the official website of the Union State published an explanation by Lukashenko which claims that "Lithuania and Poland deny the contribution of the Belarusian people to the development of historical forms of statehood on Belarusian soil" and that the "modern Lithuanians" (whose ancestors previously "lived in the darkness of paganism and led a primitive economy", while the "Polotsk and Turov principalities thundered throughout Europe as centers of spirituality and enlightenment") privatized the heritage of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania, but according to Lukashenko historically the language of this state was "ours [Belarusian]", "the people are 80% ours – Slavs", the dominant faith was Eastern Christianity (Orthodoxy) and the state mainly constituted of modern Belarusian, Ukrainian, and Russian territories. ^[93] In July 2022, during the Independence Day celebration, Lukashenko claimed that the Belarusian ethnos was the "backbone" of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania which was "the first Belarusian country" and "a defensive alliance with the Baltic tribes, where the Slavs taught them to read, introduced them to the philosophy of Christianity". ^[94] However, the same month the statues of Grand Dukes Vytautas and Jogaila, who were called "Polish occupiers", were removed from the Belarusian National History Museum. ^[56] Furthermore, there were cases in 2022 when people in Belarus were arrested or even sentenced to multiple years in prison for the usage of Pahonia (one of the historical names of the coat of arms of Lithuania, alternative unofficial coat of arms of Belarus with a horse rider closely resembles it and bears the same name) when they publicly painted it or left a sticker featuring it. ^{[95] [96]}

In March 2023, Zianon Pazniak stated that "in our history and our culture Vilnius is our head, the loss of Vilnius turned out to be very disadvantageous for us", and further claimed that the Lithuanians have no rights to Vilnius, provided propositions how Vilnius could be separated from Lithuania by granting Vilnius an "independent city" status, a "special status" or a "common city" status or making it "Belarusian", and used term "Letuvisy" when describing Lithuanians. ^{[97] [98] [99]} While in one of his earlier published articles Pazniak wrote that "in 1939, 'Letuvisy' accepted Stalin's offer to take Vilnius (...) lost their independence (...) but historically (at least for today) they won. Vilnius remained in Letuva". ^[100]

On 18 March 2023, Íhar Marzaliúk  [ be ], a Belarusian historian, archaeologist and politician, known for his support of Lukashenko's policies, ^[101] claimed in his television show that Vilnius was not established by Baltic-Lithuanians [балты-літоўцы] at all but by Krivichs, who he equated to "our [Belarusians] ancestors" and stressed that despite Vilnius currently not being part of the Republic of Belarus, it must "remain in our [Belarusians] historical memory and hearts". ^[102] In October 2023, Marzaliúk, acting as the Chairman of the Commission on Education, Culture and Science of the House of Representatives of the National Assembly of the Republic of Belarus, publicly presented in the premises of the Belarusian State University his newly published book about the history of Belarus titled Symbols of the Belarusian Eternity: Historical Symbols of the Belarusian Eternity [Сімвалы беларускай вечнасці: гісторыя сімвалаў беларускай дзяржаўнасці]. ^[103] This Marzaliúk's book was published by the Belarus Publishing House  [ be ], which is controlled by the Ministry of Information of the Republic of Belarus  [ be ], while its content is based on Marzaliúk's television show Symbols of Belarusian Eternity [Сімвалы беларускай вечнасці], but is also supplemented with additional content. ^[104]

"This problem is artificially created, I am absolutely sure that 99 percent of Belarusians have never heard of Litvinism. This is created here now so that Lithuanians and Belarusians would be set against each other, just to provoke people and this discussion. This is only talked about in Lithuania, there are no such discussions in Belarus at all. We will never question the integrity of Lithuania. Vilnius is a Lithuanian city. I don't understand why people talk about it at all, because it is only intended to set Lithuanians and Belarusians against each other. (...) There is not even such an idea in Belarusian society. Call the historians and talk. Belarusians respect the integrity and heritage of Lithuania."

— Sviatlana Tsikhanouskaya ^{[7] [33]}

On 23 August 2023, Belarusian opposition leader Sviatlana Tsikhanouskaya stated that the theory of Litvinism was put forward in order to set at variance Lithuanians and Belarusians, that Belarus would never question the integrity of Lithuania, and that Vilnius was a city of Lithuania. ^[7] Moreover, Tsikhanouskaya claimed that Belarusians generally do not talk about Litvinism and that these are isolated, marginal cases. ^[33] On the other hand, according to Lithuanian military historian Karolis Zikaras, Litvinist attitude prevails in the society of Belarus, but there is an increase of Belarusian historians who look more objectively at the history of their country. ^[12]

According to Lithuanian scientist Artūras Dubonis, the ethnogenesis of Belarusians is still in process and its community is divided into two unequal groups: pro-Moscow (larger) and pro-Western (smaller), however both of these groups seek to find or create historical ethno-cultural supports and the pro-Moscow ones also do not want to become Russians/Muscovites. ^[105] During a poll conducted in 2021, 86% of Belarusians evaluated Russia positively, Russian President Vladimir Putin received 60% support and about two-thirds supported the development of the Union State. ^[106]

Belarusian oppositionist Siarhei Kavalenka wishes glory to the great Aryan Belarusian–Lithuanian nation

In April 2023, Belarusian oppositionist Siarhei Kavalenka with others organized a political demonstration near the Embassy of Lithuania in Warsaw, which by them was described as "Samogitian Embassy" ("[амбасады Жмудзі [ambasady Žmudzi]"), and its participants narrated that the "Samogitian Government" ("[жамойцкага ўраду [žamojckaha ŭradu]") laws are discriminatory towards the "Belarusian–Lithuanians" ("[беларусаў ліцьвінаў [bielarusaŭ lićvinaŭ]") and suggested to do not use "our name" in the future. ^[107]

On 14 August 2023, Vladislav Zhivitsa (who previously fled from Russia) and Yan Rudzik held a press conference where they announced that they are planning to recreate independent Smolensk statehood in a close union with Belarus and other countries whose territories were part of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania because "Smolensk is a Belarusian land which is under Moscow occupation". ^[108]

On 26 August 2023, Aleś Čajčyc, a Member of the Presidium at the Rada of the Belarusian Democratic Republic, claimed that "we [Belarusians]" are the descendants of the historical Litvins ("літвінаў [litvinaŭ]") and Lithuanians ("летувісы [letuvisy]") are also their descendants. ^[109] Also in August 2023 Čajčyc stated that the discussion on a topic of territorial claims of Belarusians to the Republic of Lithuania is "heating up more and more actively", as well that the Grand Duchy of Lithuania was the "golden age of Belarusian statehood" and that identifying modern Lithuanians with historical Lithuanians is an "unforgivable simplification". ^[110] Furthermore, Čajčyc claimed that modern Lithuania ("сучаснай Летувой [sučasnaj Letuvoj]") should be clearly linguistically separated from the Grand Duchy of Lithuania ("Вялікім княствам Літоўскім [Vialikim kniastvam Litoŭskim]") and historical Lithuania ("істарычнай Літвой [istaryčnaj Litvoj]") because according to him the usage of the same word [Летува / Letuva] "creates confusion" which is "useful for Lithuanian ("летувіскага [letuviskaha]") nationalist historical myth". ^[109] Nevertheless, according to Čajčyc, the term Samogitia ("Жмудзь [Žmudź]") is not suitable because the Republic of Lithuania is more than that [Samogitia]. ^[109] In the same post Čajčyc also stated by using a hashtag that he is a proud Litvinist. ^[109] On 26 October 2023, Čajčyc criticized the usage of the name Vilnius ("Вільнюс") when referring to the "ancient Lithuanian capital" ("старадаўняй літоўскай сталіцы [staradaŭniaj litoŭskaj stalicy]") in Belarusian because according to him such a name is a "word from the colonial Soviet dictionary". ^[111] On 27 October 2023, Čajčyc suggested to make Belarusian, Lithuanian ("летувіскую [letuviskuju]") and Polish as semi-official languages in the region compromising of Białystok, Vilnius, and Grodno. ^[112]

In November 2023, a discussion of Belarusian opposition was held in Warsaw during which Belarusian historian Cimoch Akudovič (Цімох Акудовіч) narrated that for the Belarusians the concept that Vilnius is "theirs" is important and that the monoethnic Vilnius is "some kind of nonsense", therefore Belarusian elements in Vilnius should be "restored". ^{[113] [114]} Soon afterwards, also in November 2023, Cimoch Akudovič sent a letter of apology to the Lithuanian news portal DELFI where he narrated that he said a "disappointing stupidity". ^[115]

On 19 November 2023, Alexei Dzermant, a Belarusian philosopher, journalist and political observer, stated that Vilnius is a "Belarusian city" and criticized emigrated Belarusian politicians who according to him "favor Lithuanian chauvinists" and do not defend Belarusians interests, thus he claimed that the Belarusian national movement in Lithuania must be organized and led by other leaders. ^[116] On the other hand, Dzermant previously advocated the banning of the white-red-white flag in February 2021. ^[117]

On 15 March 2024, Belarusian online news outlet Charter 97 published an article where it claimed that the Battle of Saule in 1236 near Šiauliai was won by the Belarusian Army, despite the fact that it was won by Samogitians commanded by Samogitian Duke Vykintas. ^{[118] [119]}

On 24 March 2024, Pazniak congratulated the Belarusians with Freedom Day and claimed that factually in 1918 the Grand Duchy of Lithuania was restored but with a name Belarus, while in the territory of Samogitia appeared "Letuva". ^[120]

On 19 January 2025, Dzianis Kuchynski, a representative of Belarusian oppositionist Sviatlana Tsikhanouskaya, stated that the coat of arms of Pahonia (horse rider) depicted on the New Belarus passport project is not the same symbol as Lithuanian Vytis (coat of arms of Lithuania), although they have a historical connection based on the shared past. ^[121] Previously the New Belarus passport received criticism from Lithuanian politicians (e.g. Audronius Ažubalis) for "coveting other countries symbols" and because it featured a map of Belarus where the Lithuanian territory of Dieveniškės eldership was allocated to Belarus. ^{[122] [123]} According to Ažubalis, it would be simple if the Belarusian democratic opposition wrote a statement from which we would see that they "are not a tool in the hands of Litvinists", however they "do not want to dispel doubts". ^[122]

In Lithuania

Lithuanian (Lingwa Lietowia) was mentioned as one of the languages of the participants of the Council of Constance in a 15th century chronicle by Ulrich of Richenthal.

Universitas lingvarum Litvaniae , Vilnius, 1737.

According to Lithuanian scientists, the Ruthenian language was one of the chancellery languages of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania (also with Latin, Polish), but they deny that it was a state language, while Lithuanian was mostly a spoken language in ethnographic Lithuania until the 17th century (later partly). ^{[124] [125]}

A fragment of an 18th-century map by Nicolas de Fer in which Lithuania proper (Vraye Lithuanie), which the Lithuanian scientists consider as a state founding Baltic-origin core of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania, is clearly separated with a green line from Samogitia (Samogitie) and the Belarusian territories of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania (Russie Blanche ou Lituanique) and includes the cities of Vilnius, Kaunas, Trakai, Balbieriškis, Alytus, Ukmergė, Šalčininkai, Ashmyany (Ašmena), Grodno (Gardinas), Lida (Lyda), Braslaw (Breslauja), etc.

Henri Chatelain's map of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania (1712) where the Belarusian (Russie Blanche) territories are depicted outside of the Lithuania proper (Lithuanie propre), which is marked in green, while the Duchy of Samogitia is marked in pink

Ethnic composition of the former Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth according to Roderich von Erckert, Saint Petersburg, 1863. Aukštaitian Lithuanians (marked in orange) are listed as Litvins.

Numerous Lithuanian authors view "Litvinism" as potentially dangerous or harmful for the modern Lithuanian state. ^{[130] [131] [132] [133]} In 1996, Lithuanian historian Edvardas Gudavičius criticized Mikola Yermalovich's theories by providing scientific counterarguments. ^[134] Furthermore, Lithuanian scientists deny that Novogrudok anytime in its history was the capital of Lithuania and tractate it is as a "parasitic myth" in Belarusian historiography. ^[24]

According to Lithuanian scientist Zigmas Zinkevičius, some Belarusian nationalists present the Belarusians' historical affiliation with the Grand Duchy of Lithuania in an anti-historical way because they claim that the Grand Duchy of Lithuania was created by the Slavic Litvins (who according to them are the current Belarusians ancestors), while they describe the current Lithuanians as "lietuvisai" who according to them were previously called Samogitians (not "lićviny") and did not participate in the creation of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania. ^[135] Zinkevičius also explained that the most reliable theory how the name "White Ruthenia" was established is that the White Lands ("белая земля") or White Ruthenia ("Белая Русь") did not pay tribute to the Lithuanian Dukes, unlike the Black Lands ("белая земля") or Black Ruthenia ("Черная Русь") which had to pay tribute, while the Grand Duchy of Lithuania was created by the Lithuanian-speakers. ^[135] Moreover, Zinkevičius pointed out that the Belarusian historian, professor Jakaŭ Traščanok  [ be ] in 2003 acknowledged that there was no large preponderance of Slavs over the Balts in the early years of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania's existence (compared to the contemporary times because Western Ruthenian principalities were very scarcely populated), territories inhabited by the Balts were previously vaster than are currently and the ethnic Lithuanian units formed the basis of Lithuanian military power, while the German chroniclers wrote by strictly distinguishing the Lithuanians from Slavs. ^{[135] [136]}

According to Lithuanian historian Artūras Dubonis, the theories of Mikola Yermalovich and Alexander Kravtsevich have nothing in common with the science of history, distort the past of the Lithuanian nation and are politically motivated to strengthen the Belarusians' self-awareness and their statehood. ^[137]

In 2013, Lithuanian Ministry of National Defence stated that the Belarusians attempt to present Lithuanian monarchs as Belarusians in an information warfare part of Russian attempts to discredit Lithuania's efforts to restore its independence. ^[138]

In 2014, Lithuanian historian Alfredas Bumblauskas claimed that the relations with the Belarusians should be reconsidered (e.g. by establishing counterpropaganda institutions) because the Belarusians spread heritage propaganda and have appropriated the history of Lithuania. ^[139] Furthermore, Bumblauskas said that to him the imperialistic-minded Belarusians remind Adolf Hitler's aspirations in the Sudetenland. ^[139] Moreover, Bumblauskas recalled that already 15 years ago there were messages in the internet claiming that Vilnius will see Belarusian tanks with the symbolism of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania. ^[139] Bumblauskas stressed that historically Lithuanian monarch Algirdas was the creator of the Lithuanian Empire who annexed through conquests and marriages large parts of the current Belarusian and Ukrainian territories. ^[139]

In August 2023, Laurynas Kasčiūnas, the Chairman of the National Security and Defense Committee of Seimas, said that Litvinism is a threat to Lithuania because it is a concept where, on the one hand, Belarusians appropriate the tradition of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania, on the other hand, they push us aside, saying that the national state of Lithuania is a Russian project. ^[140] According to Kasčiūnas, Lithuania cannot tolerate an ideology of Litvinism that denies Lithuania's identity and memory and appealed to the Belarusian opposition regarding the issue. ^[141] In November 2023, Kasčiūnas said that identical restrictions should be applied to the Belarusians like to the citizens of the Russian Federation. ^[113] Another member of the National Security and Defense Committee of Seimas, Raimundas Lopata, urged Lithuanian institutions to create a strategy of Lithuania's policy towards hostile Belarus by including measures to completely close the Belarus–Lithuania border, strengthened border protection and measures to combat Litvinism which he described as Kremlin hybrid warfare. ^[142] Petras Auštrevičius, Member of the European Parliament, also named Litvinism as a hybrid warfare designed to antagonize nations, create mistrust and historical revanchism. ^[143] In November 2023, Lopata said that the Belarusians often deviates into the theories of Litvinism and seeks to deprive a part of history of Lithuania for themselves, however the Belarusians should concentrate to the independence of Belarus, not the conquests of Vilnius. ^{[144] [ better source needed ]} The State Security Department of Lithuania (VSD) stated in August 2023 that the supporters of the radical Belarusian nationalist ideology of Litvinism claims that modern-day Belarusians are the true heirs to the legacy of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania, thus they are making territorial claims to other countries surrounding Belarus, including Lithuania and its capital city Vilnius; however, their activities do not pose a real threat to the sovereignty, constitutional order and territorial integrity of the Republic of Lithuania at the moment, but may increase inter-ethnic tensions and negative attitudes towards Belarusian community in Lithuania. ^{[145] [146]} The VSD also stated that the Litvinists are against the governments of Belarus and Russia and do not support narrative that Russians and Belarusians are "one people", thus part of the Litvinists departed to EU countries amid repressions against them. ^{[145] [146]} Also, in August 2023, it was announced that 910 Belarusians and 254 Russians were recognized as a threat to the national security of Lithuania and all these 1164 foreigners were prohibited to arrive in Lithuania. ^[147]

According to Lithuanian politician Vytautas Sinica, Litvinism is especially characteristic of the opponents of Alexander Lukashenko's rule and the denial of Lithuanian historical statehood by them is a serious issue, which is incompatible with the national security of Lithuania, therefore he suggested to inquire Belarusians, who want to live in Lithuania, who founded the Grand Duchy of Lithuania and Vilnius. ^[148] According to Sinica, Belarus was highly sovietized during the Soviet period and currently it lacks national identity, thus attempting to solve this issue the theory of Litvinism is employed and is becoming more popular. ^[149]

In September 2023, members of the Seimas unanimously voted for the proposed amendment to the Lithuanian Law on the State Flag and other flags which consist of the permission to raise the historical flag of Lithuania (with Vytis) at border checkpoints and near private homes during historical Lithuanian public holidays. The initiator of the changes, Andrius Kupčinskas  [ lt ], pointed out Litvinism from the Belarusian side as one of the reasons for these changes. ^[150]

On 30 September 2023, Dainius Gaižauskas  [ lt ], a Deputy Chairman of the National Security and Defense Committee of the Seimas, said that a topic of Litvinism must be legally included in a questionnaire of the Lithuanian Migration Department to determine person's opinion about Litvinism, and drew parallels between Litvinism and Russian propaganda which justified the Russian invasion of Ukraine with "falsified facts". ^[151] According to Justinas Dementavičius, a scientist of the Vilnius University Institute of International Relations and Political Science, Litvinism is a romantic or radical form of Belarusian nationalism, which questions the fact that historically the Lithuanians created the State of Lithuania. ^[151]

On 2 October 2023 a discussion was held in Seimas Palace with Lithuanian, Polish, Belarusian scientists, writers and politicians about the origin of Litvinism, its influence and challenges in Belarusians and Lithuanians relations. ^[152] One of the members of the Lithuanian coalition government, Liberals' Movement, announced that the purpose of the discussion in Seimas Palace was searching for ways to stop the radical Litvinism ideology. ^[153] Soon afterwards, also in October 2023, a video was published online where three armed men standing in front of the Belarusian white-red-white flags issued threats to Lithuanian politicians, demanded to stop persecuting Belarusians and explained that the Grand Duchy of Lithuania was a Belarusian, not a Lithuanian state. ^[88]

In July 2024 a dozen of Belarusian organizations which are operating in Lithuania (e.g. public organization Dapamoga, Belarusian Council for Culture, public organization Litvinai, etc.) signed a declaration with which they distanced themselves from the ideology of Litvinism and denied any territorial claims to Lithuania. ^[35]

On 25 February 2025, 67 public figures, bloggers, historians, donors of support to Ukraine and other representatives of Lithuanian society addressed a public letter to the President of Lithuania Gitanas Nausėda, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and members of Seimas on protesting the appropriation of Lithuanian Vytis by the Belarusians, called Pahonya by them. The letter points out that while initially Pahonya was a symbol of anti-Communist independence and later of Belarusian anti-Lukashenka opposition, in recent times it is increasingly becoming the banner of pseudohistorical Litvinism. ^[154]

In Russia

Tomas Baranauskas claims that Litvinism also has some supporters in Russia, although it is much less popular than in Belarus. ^[8] According to Belarusian historian Alieś Biely  [ be ], Litvinism is the frontier ideology of Russian civilization. ^[155] According to Virginijus Savukynas, a Lithuanian historian and journalist, Litvinism is the Belarusian variant of the ideology of Russian imperialism and the beginning of Litvinism lie in the Russian Empire when it annexed the Grand Duchy of Lithuania in 1795 and then Russian Empress Catherine the Great claimed that she just "restored historical truth". ^[156]

In an interview held by Lietuvos rytas , the Belarusian journalist Alesis Mikas stated that the Russian Government could be using the new phenomenon of Litvinism in Belarus as a form of hybrid warfare against Lithuania. ^[157]

Lev Krishtapovich claims that:

In fact, under the guise of Belarusian nationalism, or the so-called Litvinism, a Polish gentry clique stands aimed at transforming Belarus into Poland's eastern frontiers. ^{[158] [159]}

In response to the Belarusian nationalism and unable to erase the importance of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania (GDL) for the formation of the Belarusian nation, Russian propaganda seek to slavicize GDL and its rulers. ^[70] Additionally, Russia actively deny occupation of the Baltic states and tractate Baltic states statehood of 1918 and 1990 as temporary and accidental formations resulting from crises in Russia. ^[160] Since GDL, which has existed for more than 500 years, prevents such a narrative in relation to Lithuania, several strategies are used in Russia to rewrite GDL history. ^[160] According to one of the strategies, it is aimed to present the GDL as a "historical misunderstanding" in the area of Russian civilization that allegedly gravitated towards Poland, and in some publications the entire Baltic region is named as the historical area of Russia since the 10th–12th centuries. ^{[160] [161]} According to another strategy, it is claimed that the GDL also supposedly was a Russian (Ruthenian) state ("more democratic"), which has nothing to do nor with the 20th century "Samogitian" statehood of Lithuania, nor with Ukraine and Belarus as historical entities. ^{[160] [162]} Even in Russian sources that emphasize the subjectivity of the history of the GDL, the "Russian" aspects are treated as phenomena of the history of Russia, not Ukraine or Belarus. ^[160]

Russian far-right political philosopher Aleksandr Dugin claims that after the Golden Horde there was not one Russia (Rusj Moskovskaja – Grand Duchy of Moscow), but two – also a "Lithuanian Russia" (Rusj Litovskaja – GDL), which had a majority population (80%) of Orthodox Slavs who also were the elites of the state and at the same time deny the Baltic origin of the GDL and claim that the rulers of the GDL were Russians. ^{[74] [163] [164] [70]} Other Russian historians (for example, Michail Kojalovich, Nikolai Ustrialov, Matvei Liubavskii) in their publications consider the GDL as a state of Western Russia, and the expansion of the GDL to the east and south was supposedly a process of unification of Russian lands in which Western Russia (GDL) and Eastern Russia (Muscovy) competed. ^[165] Also, Russian historians often call the vicegerents of the GDL rulers as Russian dukes because they supposedly spoke Russian and claims that the GDL was a Slavic state because its written language was Slavic. ^[70] According to these Russian historians, precisely because of the majority of Orthodox Slavs in the population of the GDL, the GDL was supposedly a "non-Baltic" or "non-Lithuanian" state. ^[70] These Russian paradigms are taken from the 19th century and are intended to justify the destruction of the GDL. ^[160] From such Russian points of view, the partitions of the Polish–Lithuanian Commonwealth and GDL were essentially a "restoration" of the separated Russian lands. ^[166] These assumptions are also actively echoed by Litvinists, who claim that the Slavic (Litvin) origin of the GDL can be judged from the fact that its political elite allegedly spoke Old East Slavic language (Litvin language), however actually in the GDL it was only one of the written languages, not a spoken language. ^[70] Moreover, historically only the Slavic voivodeships of the GDL (six out of nine) were referred to as "Lithuanian Ruthenia" (Litovskaja Rus). ^[41]

Russian historian Igor Tyapin claim that the ideology of Litvinism in Belarusian history is oriented towards ethno-constructivism and he criticized Litvinist doctrine by compiling a list of the main signs of pseudoscience. ^[167]

See also

• Coat of arms of Lithuania
• Belarusian nationalism
• Belarusian national revival
• Lithuanian national revival
• Ethnographic Lithuania
• Lithuanians in Belarus
• Polesie (association)
• Russification of Belarus

Notes

1. The article of Darius Sutkus spells his name as I. Kulakovskis, i.e., Ignacijus Kulakovskis.

References

Citations

1. Snyder, Timothy (2003). The Reconstruction of Nations: Poland, Ukraine, Lithuania, Belarus, 1569–1999. Yale University Press. pp. 19–22. ISBN   978-0-300-10586-5.
2. Ioffe, Grigory (2008). Understanding Belarus and How Western Foreign Policy Misses the Mark. Rowman & Littlefield. pp. 41–45.
3. Plokhy, Serhii (2006). The Origins of the Slavic Nations: Premodern Identities in Russia, Ukraine, and Belarus. Cambridge University Press. pp. 95–100.
4. Bakaitė, Jurga (27 December 2011). "LRT FAKTAI. Ar lietuviams reikia bijoti baltarusių nacionalinio atgimimo?" (in Lithuanian). Lithuanian National Radio and Television.
5. Dubonis 2005, p. 520–521, 524.
6. Pazniak, Kiryla (10 October 2019). "80 гадоў без Вільні". Novy Chas (in Belarusian). Retrieved 15 October 2023.
7. Gaučaitė-Znutienė, Modesta; Skėrytė, Jūratė (23 August 2023). "Cichanouskaja apie litvinizmo apraiškas: tai kuriama dirbtinai, norint sukiršinti lietuvius ir baltarusius". Lithuanian National Radio and Television, Baltic News Service (in Lithuanian). Retrieved 11 September 2023.
8. Venckūnas, V. (29 September 2012). "Tomas Baranauskas: Litvinistams svarbiausia turėti gražią istoriją, kuri galėtų sutelkti tautą". Bernardinai.lt (in Lithuanian).
9. Yermalovich, Mikola (1990). Starazhytnaya Belarus': Polatski i Novaharodski peryyady. Minsk: Mastatskaya Litaratura. ISBN   5-340-00614-X.
10. Stone, Daniel (2001). The Polish-Lithuanian State, 1386-1795. University of Washington Press. p. 12. ISBN   978-0295980935.
11. Vytautas the Great; Valkūnas, Leonas (translation from Latin). Vytauto laiškai [ Letters of Vytautas the Great ] (PDF) (in Lithuanian). Vilnius University, Institute of Lithuanian Literature and Folklore. p. 6. Retrieved 2 October 2023. Juk pirmiausia Jūs padarėte ir paskelbėte sprendimą dėl Žemaičių žemės, kuri yra mūsų paveldėjimas ir mūsų tėvonija iš teisėtos prosenolių bei senolių įpėdinystės. Ją ir dabar nuosavybėje turime, ji dabar yra ir visada buvo viena ir ta pati Lietuvos žemė, nes yra viena kalba bei tie patys gyventojai. Taip pat Žemaitijos žmonės nuo senų laikų save vadino lietuviais ir niekada žemaičiais, ir dėl tokio tapatumo (sic) savo rašte mes nerašome apie Žemaitiją, nes viskas yra viena, vienas kraštas ir tie patys gyventojai.
12. Gurevičius, Ainis. "Karininkas: jie kels ginklą prieš Lietuvą nuoširdžiai tikėdami, kad Vilnius priklauso jiems". Alfa.lt (in Lithuanian). Retrieved 2 October 2023.
13. Kirkevich, Ales (29 January 2017). ""Яшчэ не позна вярнуць краіне сапраўднае імя — Літва" ["It is not too late for returning to our state its real name: Lithuania"]". Novy Chas (in Belarusian).
14. Brückner, Aleksander (1988). Mikołaj Rej. Państwowe Wydawn. Nauk. p. 14. ISBN   978-83-01-08023-5.
15. Griškaitė, Reda (2018). "Zalučės ir Bareikiškių šeimininko Vladislovo Sirokomlės istorikos" (PDF). Archivum Lithuanicum (in Lithuanian and Polish). 20: 49.
16. Dubonis 2016, p. 1–30.
17. Stone, Daniel (2001). The Polish-Lithuanian State, 1386–1795. University of Washington Press. pp. 4, 52. ISBN   978-0-295-98093-5.
18. Pazniak, Zianon (December 2016). "Belarus-Litva". Pazniak.info. Retrieved 7 October 2023.
19. Краўцэвіч, Аляксандар (20 July 2023). "Чаму трэба казаць і "Літва", і "Летува". Аргумэнты гісторыка Алеся Краўцэвіча". Радыё Свабода (in Belarusian). Retrieved 14 October 2023.
20. Viačorka, Vincuk; Šupa, Siarhiei (20 February 2020). "Чаму Літва, а не "Летува"". Radio Liberty (in Belarusian). Retrieved 14 October 2023.
21. Sutkus 2020a.
22. Dubonis 2005, p. 520–521.
23. "У Беларусі рыхтуецца святкаванне 1000-годдзя назвы Літва". European Radio for Belarus (in Belarusian). 22 January 2009. Retrieved 23 November 2023.
24. Dubonis, Artūras (2 October 2020). "The Myth of Navahrudak | Orbis Lituaniae". LDKistorija.lt. Vilnius University . Retrieved 20 October 2023.
25. Janssonius, Guilhelmus. "Magni Ducatus Lithuaniae Caeterarumque Regionum Illi Adjacentium . . . Anno 1613". Vkraina.com.
26. Kurdiukov, Oleg (30 September 2023). "Mūsų rusų gatvė. Litvinizmo įtaka baltarusių ir lietuvių santykiams bei "Caritas" parama Ukrainai". Lithuanian National Television and Radio (in Russian and Lithuanian). Retrieved 18 October 2023.
27. Казакевіч, А. (2003). Вялікае Княства Літоўскае як ідэалагічная рэальнасць [The Grand Duchy of Lithuania as an Ideological Reality]. Arche (5): 43–60. Archived from the original on 16 April 2012.
28. Such terminology is also used by some modern Russian historians, for example, Andrey_Dvornichenko.
29. Казакевіч, А. (2003). Вялікае Княства Літоўскае як ідэалагічная рэальнасць [The Grand Duchy of Lithuania as an Ideological Reality]. Arche (5): 43–60. Archived from the original on 16 April 2012.
30. Купала, Янка. Поўны збор твораў: у 9 т.[Complete Works: in 9 vol.]. Vol. 8. p. 36.
31. The term "Grand Duchy of Lithuania-Belarus" is used by Tsvikevich. See: Цвикевич, А. Беларусь: политический очерк (перевод с белорусского)[Belarus: Political Essay (translation from Belarusian)]. p. 5.
32. Купала, Янка. Поўны збор твораў: у 9 т.[Complete Works: in 9 vol.]. Vol. 8. pp. 76–78.
33. Valkauskas, Tomas (12 September 2023). "Litvinizmo baimė: ar Lietuva labiau pripratusi prie Lukašenkos, o ne demokratinės Baltarusijos?". Lithuanian National Radio and Television (in Lithuanian). Retrieved 17 September 2023.
34. "Gudijos fašistai atidarė filialą Vilniuj". Alkas.lt (in Lithuanian). 28 August 2023.
35. Venckūnas, Vilmantas (11 July 2024). "Baltarusių visuomeninės organizacijos Lietuvoje atsiriboja nuo litvinizmo". Lithuanian National Radio and Television (in Lithuanian). Retrieved 11 July 2024.
36. Repečkaitė, Daiva (26 July 2022). "Medieval history powers a crisis of identity in Lithuania and Belarus". Coda. Retrieved 7 August 2023.
37. "Litwinizm – nowe zjawisko na Białorusi [Litvinism - a new phenomenon in Belarus]". Kresy.pl (in Polish). 24 July 2008.
38. Литвин, Игорь. "Где находилась летописная Литва". Litvin.by (in Russian). Archived from the original on 22 April 2021. Retrieved 18 October 2023.
39. Кіркевіч, Алесь. ""Ліцвіны": патрыёты, секта або агенты ФСБ?". Belsat.eu (in Belarusian). Archived from the original on 22 February 2020. Retrieved 22 February 2020.
40. "Baltarusijos istorija". Visuotinė lietuvių enciklopedija (in Lithuanian). Retrieved 15 October 2023.
41. Mockienė, Jurgita; Spečiūnas, Vytautas. "Baltarusijos santykiai su Lietuva". Visuotinė lietuvių enciklopedija (in Lithuanian). Retrieved 17 September 2023.
42. "Baltarusijos rada". Visuotinė lietuvių enciklopedija (in Lithuanian). Retrieved 15 October 2023.
43. Dubonis 2005, p. 524.
44. Lukšas, Aras. "Kaip Vilnius netapo Baltarusijos miestu". Lietuvos aidas (in Lithuanian). Retrieved 17 November 2023.
45. Sahanovič, Hienadź (2008). The Grand Duchy of Lithuania as a mirror of Belarusian historiography. Sejny: Fundacja Pogranicze. pp. 244–273. Retrieved 3 November 2023.
46. Урбан, Паўла (1960–1964). "Пра нацыянальны характар Вялікага Княства Літоўскага й гістарычны тэрмін "Літва"". Knihi.com (in Belarusian). Retrieved 26 November 2023.
47. Урбан, Паўла (1972). "У сьвятле гістарычных фактаў". Knihi.com (in Belarusian). Retrieved 26 November 2023.
48. Dubonis 2005, p. 521.
49. Dubonis 2005, p. 522.
50. Kuzmickas, Bronislovas; Plečkaitis, Vytautas Petras (2016). "Nelengva geros kaimynystės pradžia. Baltarusija" (PDF). Nepriklausomybės sąsiuviniai (in Lithuanian). 3 (17): 15–16, 78. Retrieved 11 September 2023.
51. "Belarus Official Lays Claim To Lithuanian Border Lands". The New York Times . 25 February 1992. Retrieved 8 October 2023.
52. Leonavičiūtė-Gecevičienė, Rasa; Šadauskas, Vilius (2023). Lietuvos ir Baltarusijos kultūriniai ir istoriniai ryšiai (PDF) (in Lithuanian). Kaunas: Vytautas Magnus University. p. 48. ISBN   978-609-467-564-5 . Retrieved 8 October 2023.
53. Jonkus, Artūras (13 June 2024). "V. Baublys: "Pretenzijos į LDK istoriją buvo būdingos vadinamajai A. Lukašenkos opozicijai"". IQ.lt (in Lithuanian).
54. Jonkus, Artūras (6 June 2024). "J. V. Paleckis: A. Lukašenka iš pradžių atmetė litvinizmo idėjas, bet po to ėmė jas skatinti". IQ.lt (in Lithuanian).
55. "Lietuvos Respublikos ir Baltarusijos Respublikos sutartis dėl geros kaimynystės ir bendradarbiavimo". Official website of Seimas (in Lithuanian). Retrieved 11 September 2023.
56. "Lukashenko and the Grand Duchy of Lithuania – appropriation of history or taking distance from Moscow?". Lithuanian National Radio and Television . 30 July 2022.
57. "ЛИТВИНЫ - ИСТОРИЧЕСКАЯ ЕВРОПЕЙСКАЯ НАЦИЯ НА ТЕРРИТОРИИ БЕЛАРУСИ". Litvania.org (in Russian). Archived from the original on 8 October 2013.
58. Rakicki, Viačaslaŭ; Trusaŭ, Alieh (22 February 2005). "Беларускія калёніі на беразе Балтыйскага мора – Інфляндзкае княства і Курляндыя". Радыё Свабода (in Belarusian). Retrieved 26 October 2023.
59. Trusaŭ, Alieh (2 October 2016). "Алег Трусаў: Хай маладзейшыя бяруць уладу!". Novy Chas (in Belarusian). Retrieved 26 October 2023.
60. Skobla, Michas; Trusaŭ, Alieh (13 October 2016). "Алег Трусаў выдаў "Гісторыю сярэднявечнай Еўропы" — гутарка". Nasha Niva (in Belarusian). Retrieved 26 October 2023.
61. Arloŭ, Uladzimir; Navumčyk, Siarhiej; Katkoŭski, Uladzimir (11 December 2007). "Вільня, Вялікае Княства і Беларусь — поўны тэкст онлайнавай канфэрэнцыі з Уладзімерам Арловым". Radio Liberty (in Belarusian). Retrieved 20 October 2023.
62. Pazniak, Zianon (15 September 2005). "(Разьдзел з артыкула "Прамаскоўскі рэжым")". Bielarus.net (in Belarusian). Retrieved 7 October 2023.
63. "Вялікае Княства Літоўскае Беларусь — пражэкцёрства ці візіянэрства?". Nasha Niva (in Belarusian). 11 November 2005. Retrieved 15 October 2023.
64. Coakley, Amanda (28 October 2022). "Inside the Fight To Preserve the Belarusian Language". Time . Archived from the original on 6 February 2024. Retrieved 7 October 2023.
65. Sahanovič, Hienadź; Kravtsevich, Alexander (31 August 2009). "Гісторыя пад знакам Пагоні. Вітаўт". БЕЛСАТ NEWS (in Belarusian). Retrieved 30 December 2023.
66. "В Минске вышла книга Вадима Деружинского "Тайны белорусской истории"". Budzma.org (in Russian). Retrieved 23 December 2023.
67. "Беларусы прапануюць адраджэньне ВКЛ – 23.04.1918". Radabnr.org (in Belarusian). 13 November 2017. Retrieved 22 December 2023.
68. Пазняк, Зянон (December 2016). "БЕЛАРУСЬ-ЛІТВА". Pazniak.info (in Belarusian). Retrieved 7 October 2023.
69. Пазняк, Зянон. "ГЭТА СЛОВА САКРАЛЬНАЕ. АБ НЕКАТОРЫХ АСПЭКТАХ БЕЛАРУСКАГА АДРАДЖЭНЬНЯ І ПАРАЗЫ РУСКАЙ ПАЛІТЫКІ". Pazniak.info (in Belarusian). Retrieved 9 October 2023.
70. Sutkus, Darius (2020b). "Litvinizmas II: Baltarusija – ideologinės kovos laukas". Karys (in Lithuanian). 2.
71. Pankūnė, Dainora. "Kokiu tikslu Lukašenka svaidosi išgalvotais kaltinimais: ar baltarusių pajėgos ruošiasi naujiems iššūkiams". DELFI (in Lithuanian). Retrieved 11 September 2023.
72. Rimkevičienė, Liepa; Jakilaitis, Edmundas. "Dekonstrukcijos. Rusija propagandos mašina taikosi ne tik į LDK, Vilnių, bet ir Žalgirio mūšį". DELFI . Retrieved 4 March 2023.
73. "Редактор "Эха Москвы": Руководство России относится к Беларуси, как к Крыму". Ex-press.live (in Belarusian). 16 December 2018. Retrieved 18 November 2023.
74. Rimkevičienė, Liepa; Jakilaitis, Edmundas. "Dekonstrukcijos. Rusija propagandos mašina taikosi ne tik į LDK, Vilnių, bet ir Žalgirio mūšį". DELFI, Laisvės TV (in Lithuanian). Retrieved 9 September 2023.
75. Grigaliūnaitė, Violeta. "Istorijos profesorius baltarusiškos televizijos BELSAT laidoje apie Vilnių: jį įkūrė baltarusiai". 15min.lt (in Lithuanian). Retrieved 11 September 2023.
76. Dilius, Rimgaudas (7 December 2019). "Kas ir kodėl skatina litvinizmą?". Alkas.lt (in Lithuanian). Retrieved 11 September 2023.
77. Kraucewicz, Alaksandr (30 May 2017). "Вялікае Княства Літоўскае – Беларусь ці Летува? / Загадкі беларускай гісторыі" [Grand Duchy of Lithuania – Belarus or Lithuania?]. БЕЛСАТ NEWS (in Belarusian). Retrieved 11 September 2023.
78. Kraucewicz, Alaksandr (14 January 2019). "Вільня як нашая сталіца / Загадкі беларускай гісторыі" [Vilnius as our capital / Riddles of the history of Belarus]. БЕЛСАТ HISTORY (in Belarusian). Retrieved 11 September 2023.
79. "Intermarium – гістарычнае ток-шоў". Belsat.eu. Retrieved 11 September 2023.
80. "Intermarium". Naviny.belsat.eu. Retrieved 11 September 2023.
81. "Pietryčių Lietuvoje pradėtos retransliuoti dvi naujos televizijos programos". Lithuanian National Radio and Television (in Lithuanian). 3 June 2022. Retrieved 11 September 2023.
82. "Ад рэдакцыяў першых газетаў да ўлюбёнага бару Караткевіча: беларускія месцы Вільні". Belsat.eu (in Belarusian). 19 November 2022.
83. "Люцыян Жалігоўскі. Стваральнік самаабвешчанай дзяржавы Сярэдняя Літва". БЕЛСАТ HISTORY (in Belarusian). 9 October 2023. Retrieved 2 November 2023.
84. Краўцэвіч, Аляксандар (29 November 2022). "Літва - ЯКАЯ сапраўдная і ДЗЕ яна?". YouTube.com (in Belarusian). Retrieved 8 October 2023.
85. Sanko, Zmicer (2 March 2020). "І ўсё ж — Літва ці Летува?". Радыё Свабода (in Belarusian). Retrieved 14 October 2023.
86. "Rada of the Belarusian Democratic Republic via Twitter". Twitter (in Belarusian). 23 April 2020. Retrieved 22 December 2023.
87. Tsepkalo, Valery (28 December 2021). "ВКЛ. Маяк ДЕМОКРАТИИ. Авторский фильм Валерия Цепкало. (related timelapse from 6:20)". YouTube.com (in Russian). Retrieved 7 October 2023.
88. "TV3 Žinios. Siaubo diena Izraelyje; Litvinistai grasina Lietuvos politikams; Didmiesčiai griežtina automobilių stovėjimo kontrolę (related timelapse from 9:28)". TV3.lt (in Lithuanian). Retrieved 7 October 2023.
89. "Прэзыдыюм – Рада Беларускай Народнай Рэспублікі" [Presidium - the Council of the Belarusian People's Republic] (in Belarusian). Retrieved 6 September 2021.
90. Čajčyc, Aleś (13 August 2021). "Будзьма беларусамі! » Хобі для эрудытаў: абараняць "Пагоню" ў галоўнай сусветнай энцыклапедыі" [Hobbies for scholars: to defend the Pahonia in the world's major encyclopedia]. Будзтма беларусамі [Be Belarusians] (in Belarusian).
91. "Rada of the Belarusian Democratic Republic". Twitter . 23 September 2021.
92. "A. Lukašenka: Balstogė ir Vilnius yra Baltarusijos miestai". Lrytas.lt (in Lithuanian). 19 September 2021. Retrieved 11 November 2023.
93. "Лукашенко: необходима адекватная оценка времён ВКЛ и Речи Посполитой". Soyuz.by (in Russian). 6 January 2022. Retrieved 2 November 2023.
94. "Lukašenka pareiškė, kad baltarusiai buvo LDK stuburas" [Lukashenko stated that the Belarusians were the backbone of the GDL]. Lithuanian National Radio and Television .
95. Romanenko, Valentyna. "Lukashenko regime deems "Long live Belarus!" to be Nazi slogan". Ukrainska Pravda . Retrieved 21 October 2023.
96. "2022 Country Report on Human Rights Practices: Belarus". U.S. Embassy in Belarus. 25 May 2023. Retrieved 21 October 2023.
97. Pazniak, Zianon (26 March 2023). "Вільня - наша. Пазняк пра тое, як падзяліць сталіцу з Літвой". YouTube.com (in Belarusian). Retrieved 7 October 2023.
98. "Baltarusų opozicionierius Zenon Pazniak teigia, kad LDK ir Vilnius yra baltarusų". YouTube.com (in Belarusian and Lithuanian). 19 August 2023.
99. Pazniak, Zianon (25 March 2023). "ПАЗНЯК: як беларусы стварылі краіну, Вільня – наша, Дзень Волі – галоўнае свята, БНР – 105 год (related timelapse: from 48:10 to 01:11:32)". YouTube.com (in Belarusian). Retrieved 7 October 2023.
100. Пазняк, Зянон. "Ідэалы БНР у рэчышчы геапалітыкі". Pazniak.info (in Belarusian). Retrieved 9 October 2023.
101. Гурневіч, Дзьмітры (21 November 2022). "Дэпутат Марзалюк 13 хвілінаў бараніў на СТВ "Пагоню". Але ёсьць нюанс". Радыё Свабода (in Belarusian). Retrieved 31 October 2023.
102. Марзалюк, Ігар (18 March 2023). "Марзалюк: Вільня можа быць за межамі Беларусі, але заўсёды мусіць заставацца ў нашым сэрцы". Belarus-news.by (in Belarusian). Retrieved 31 October 2023.
103. "Презентация книги "Сімвалы беларускай вечнасці: гісторыя сімвалаў беларускай дзяржаўнасці" состоялась в БГУ". Белару́скі дзяржа́ўны ўніверсітэ́т (in Russian). Retrieved 31 October 2023.
104. Марзалюк, Íhar. "Сімвалы беларускай вечнасці: гісторыя сімвалаў беларускай дзяржаўнасці". Izdatelstvo.by (in Belarusian). Retrieved 31 October 2023.
105. Salynė, Roberta. "Kai kurių baltarusių galvose lietuviai – tik lituvisai ar "žmudai": įrodinėjama, kad dabartinė mūsų tauta neturi nieko bendra su istorine Litva". 15min.lt (in Lithuanian). Retrieved 13 September 2023.
106. Kojala, Linas (1 February 2021). "Ką baltarusiai mano apie Rusiją ir Lietuvą". Lithuanian National Radio and Television (in Lithuanian). Retrieved 13 September 2023.
107. "Mityng la ambasady Žmudzi suprać dyskryminacyji Biełarusaŭ - Licvinaŭ j kradziež spadčyny Litvy". YouTube.com (in Belarusian). 25 April 2023. Retrieved 29 December 2023.
108. "Российский депутат заявил о создании движения за независимость Смоленской области от РФ". The New Voice of Ukraine (in Russian). Retrieved 26 December 2023.
109. "Aleś Čajčyc via Facebook". Facebook.com. 26 August 2023. Retrieved 22 December 2023.
110. Чайчыц, Алесь (22 August 2023). "Бессэнсоўная, але непазьбежная спрэчка. Чаму настаў час дамовіцца, што ВКЛ — агульная спадчына". Радыё Свабода (in Belarusian). Retrieved 26 December 2023.
111. "Aleś Čajčyc via Facebook". Facebook.com (in Belarusian). 26 October 2023. Retrieved 22 December 2023.
112. "Aleś Čajčyc via Facebook". Facebook.com. 27 October 2023. Retrieved 22 December 2023.
113. "Gluminantys baltarusių istoriko žodžiai: vientautis Vilnius yra nesąmonė". DELFI, LNK (in Lithuanian). Retrieved 11 November 2023.
114. "Вільня і Варшава нашы: чаму беларусы за іх б'юцца, але не будуць захопліваць | Ток-шоу Сугак". YouTube.com (in Belarusian). 5 November 2023. Retrieved 11 November 2023.
115. "Baltarusių istoriko žodžiai Lietuvoje sukėlė šoką". DELFI (in Lithuanian). Retrieved 26 November 2023. pasakiau apmaudžią kvailystę
116. Дзермант, Аляксей. "Вильно – белорусский город". Telegram (in Russian). Retrieved 1 December 2023.
117. "Алексей Дзермант о бчб-символике: "Совершенно несостоятельны аргументы, что под этим флагом не совершались преступления"" (in Russian). Archived from the original on 4 February 2021.
118. Спаткай, Леонид. "Великие победы белорусов". Charter 97 (in Russian). Retrieved 15 March 2024.
119. "Šiaulių mūšis". Visuotinė lietuvių enciklopedija (in Lithuanian).
120. Pazniak, Zenon (24 March 2024). "Дзень Волі 2024". ВОЛЬНАЯ БЕЛАРУСЬ via YouTube.com (in Belarusian). Retrieved 24 March 2024.
121. Datkūnas, Dominykas (19 January 2025). "Į kritiką dėl pasų sureagavo Cichanouskajos atstovas: "Pagonia" nėra lietuviškas Vytis". Lithuanian National Radio and Television, ELTA .
122. Sąlygaitė, Jonė (18 January 2025). "Baltarusijos opozicijos užmojis įžiebė aštrias diskusijas: atskirkime, kas yra priešai, o kas – draugai". DELFI, Žinių radijas (in Lithuanian).
123. Stanevičiūtė, Deimantė (16 February 2024). "Baltarusijos opozicijos Lietuvoje sukurtas pasas kelia aistras: dalį Lietuvos priskyrė Baltarusijai, už klaidą atsiprašo". Alfa.lt.
124. Ragauskienė, Raimonda (2013). "Kalbinė padėtis Lietuvos Didžiojoje Kunigaikštystėje (iki XVI a. vid.): interpretacijos istoriografijoje". Lituanistica (in Lithuanian). 59 (3(93)). Lithuanian Academy of Sciences: 148–149. doi: 10.6001/lituanistica.v59i3.2730 . Retrieved 7 October 2023.
125. Dubonis 2016, p. 5–7, 24–25.
126. Spečiūnas, Vytautas. "Didžioji Lietuva" [Lithuania proper]. Visuotinė lietuvių enciklopedija (in Lithuanian). Retrieved 1 October 2023.
127. Minkevičius, Jonas; Jasas, Rimantas; Vidugiris, Aloyzas. "Gardinas". Visuotinė lietuvių enciklopedija (in Lithuanian). Retrieved 1 October 2023.
128. Ereminas, Gintautas; Garšva, Kazimieras. "Lyda". Visuotinė lietuvių enciklopedija (in Lithuanian). Retrieved 1 October 2023.
129. Garšva, Kazimieras; Gaučas, Petras. "Breslauja". Visuotinė lietuvių enciklopedija (in Lithuanian). Retrieved 1 October 2023.
130. Bakaitė, Jurga (27 December 2011). "LRT FAKTAI. Ar lietuviams reikia bijoti baltarusių nacionalinio atgimimo?" (in Lithuanian). Lithuanian National Radio and Television.
131. Bružas, Rimas; Baranauskas, Tomas (6 September 2023). "Istorijos perimetrai. Litvinizmas - istorinė fikcija ar hibridinio karo dalis?". Lithuanian National Radio and Television (in Lithuanian). Retrieved 2 October 2023.
132. Laurinkus, Mečys. "Litvinizmas ir jo pavojai: ką apie jį žino Lietuvoje ir Baltarusijoje?". Lrytas.lt (in Lithuanian). Retrieved 2 October 2023.
133. Milašius, Arūnas; Rakutis, Valdas (23 September 2023). "Tylusis istorijos pagrobimas. Litvinizmas - kas tai?". Paninfo.lt (in Lithuanian). Retrieved 2 October 2023.
134. Gudavičius, Edvardas (1996). "Following the Tracks of a Myth". Lithuanian Historical Studies. 1 (1): 38–58. doi: 10.30965/25386565-00101003 . S2CID   231347582 . Retrieved 17 September 2023.
135. Zinkevičius, Zigmas (2006). "Lietuviu etnogenezė ir Gudija". Acta Baltico-Slavica (in Lithuanian). 30. Warsaw: 27–29. Retrieved 28 October 2023.
136. Трашчанок, Якаў (2003). История Беларуси, часть 1, Досоветский период. Могилев: Министерством образования Республики Беларусь. p. 45.
137. Dubonis 2005, p. 524–525.
138. "Ministerija: Rusijos ir Baltarusijos taikiniai - Lietuvos viduramžių istorija". KaunoDiena.lt (in Lithuanian). 30 December 2013.
139. Ignatavičius, Tadas; Bumblauskas, Alfredas (1 July 2014). "A. Bumblauskas: "Baltarusiai seniai yra pasisavinę LDK istoriją"". Lrytas.lt (in Lithuanian). Retrieved 21 October 2023.
140. Vasiliauskas, Mindaugas. "Lietuvai priekaištų pažėrę baltarusiai apie LDK šaknis: "Gal laimėsim, tada pasiaiškinsim"". TV3.lt (in Lithuanian). Retrieved 17 September 2023.
141. Lyberytė, Augustė. "Kasčiūnui neramu dėl baltarusių pretenzijų į Lietuvos tapatybei svarbius simbolius: turime nusibrėžti raudonas linijas". DELFI (in Lithuanian). Retrieved 7 October 2023.
142. "Lopata ragina kurti nacionalinę strategiją Baltarusijos atžvilgiu: siūlo uždaryti sieną, kovoti su litvinizmu". Lithuanian National Radio and Television, ELTA (in Lithuanian). 16 August 2023. Retrieved 17 September 2023.
143. Miliūtė, Rita (27 August 2023). "Europarlamentaras Auštrevičius: turime būti budrūs, bet nepradėti taikyti neprotingų apribojimų baltarusiams". Lithuanian National Radio and Television (in Lithuanian). Retrieved 17 September 2023.
144. Lopata, Raimundas. "Kodėl baltarusių emigracijai rūpi Vilnius, o ne kova už Baltarusijos laisvę?". DELFI (in Lithuanian). Retrieved 11 November 2023.
145. Jakučionis, Saulius (24 August 2023). "Litvinism not a threat to Lithuania, but may stoke tensions – intelligence". Lithuanian National Radio and Television, Baltic News Service. Retrieved 17 September 2023.
146. "Litvinizmas". State Security Department of Lithuania via Facebook (in Lithuanian). Retrieved 17 September 2023.
147. "Grėsme Lietuvos nacionaliniam saugumui pripažinti 910 baltarusių ir 254 rusai". Lithuanian National Radio and Television (in Lithuanian). 4 August 2023. Retrieved 8 October 2023.
148. Sinica, Vytautas (30 August 2023). "Litvinizmas ir baltarusių problema". Lithuanian National Television and Radio (in Lithuanian). Retrieved 15 October 2023.
149. Sinica, Vytautas (30 November 2023). "XFM Pokalbis: apie baltarusių imigraciją į Lietuvą ir litvinizmą (related timelapse from 5:00)". XFM via YouTube.com (in Lithuanian). Retrieved 29 December 2023.
150. "Amendments to the law: the historical flag of Lithuania can be hoisted at border checkpoints". MadeinVilnius.lt, ELTA . 14 September 2023. Retrieved 17 September 2023.
151. Balcerytė, Emilija (30 September 2023). "Dėl litvinizmo susitarti nepavyksta: ekspertams tai pseudomokslas, NSGK atstovams – propagandos mašina". Lithuanian National Radio and Television (in Lithuanian). Retrieved 26 November 2023.
152. "2023-10-02 Diskusija "LITVINIZMAS": kilmė, įtaka ir iššūkiai baltarusių ir lietuvių santykiams". Seimas via YouTube (in Lithuanian). 2 October 2023. Retrieved 2 October 2023.
153. "Seime ieškos būdo, kaip stabdyti radikaliojo litvinizmo ideologiją". Liberalai.lt (in Lithuanian). 28 September 2023. Retrieved 2 October 2023.
154. "The battle for Vytis continues: the public is fighting against the indifference of the authorities". Voruta (in Lithuanian). 25 February 2025.
155. Lopata, Raimundas (9 October 2023). "Apie geopolitinį Baltarusijos pasirinkimą". DELFI (in Lithuanian).
156. Savukynas, Virginijus (19 September 2023). ""Litvinizmo" šaknys slypi Rusijos imperinėje ideologijoje". Lithuanian National Television and Radio (in Lithuanian). Retrieved 15 October 2023.
157. "Paminklą lietuviui atidengę baltarusiai: "Į Lydą pagaliau grįžo šeimininkas"". Lietuvos rytas (in Lithuanian). 19 September 2019.
158. Krishtapovich, Lev (21 November 2016). "Общерусская культура как основа белорусской идентичности" [All-Russian culture as the basis of Belarusian identity]. Regnum.ru (in Russian).
159. Yeliseyeu, Andrei; Laputska, Veranika (2016). "Anti-Belarus disinformation in Russian media: Trends, features, countermeasures" (PDF). EAST Media Review (1): 11.
160. Bumblauskas, Alfredas; Jegelevic̆ius, Sigitas; Potašenko, Grigorijus; Pšibilskis, Vygintas Bronius (2009). Lietuvos Didžiosios Kunigaikštijos tradicija ir tautiniai naratyvai (in Lithuanian). Vilnius: Vilniaus universiteto leidykla. pp. 19–21. ISBN   978-9955-33-500-9 . Retrieved 9 September 2023.
161. Платонов, О. А. "Прибалтика // Большая энциклопедия русского народа / Институт Русской Цивилизации" . Retrieved 9 September 2023.
162. Широкорад, А. Б (2004). "Русь и Литва. Рюриковичи против Гедеминовичей" (in Russian). Москва.{{cite journal}}: Cite journal requires |journal= (help)
163. Katinas, Petras. ""Didysis brolis" peržengia visas ribas". Xxiamzius.lt (in Lithuanian). Retrieved 9 September 2023.
164. Savukynas, Virginijus. ""Istorijos detektyvai": kodėl Rusija siekia perrašyti Lietuvos istoriją?". 15min.lt, Lrt.lt (in Lithuanian). Retrieved 9 September 2023.
165. Norkus, Zenonas (2007). "The Grand Duchy of Lithuania in the Retrospective of Comparative Historical Sociology of Empires" (PDF). World Political Science Review (in Lithuanian). 3 (4): 3. Retrieved 9 September 2023.
166. Jakštas, Juozas. "Russian historiography on the origin of the Lithuanian state: some critical remarks on V. T. Pashuto's Study". Lituanus.org. Archived from the original on 9 August 2022. Retrieved 9 September 2023.
167. Tyapin, Igor (15 October 2023). "Twelve Myths of Litvinism". Almanac “Essays on Conservatism”. 3: 276–285. doi:10.24030/24092517-2023-0-3-276-285.

Bibliography

• Budreckis, Algirdas (1967). "ETNOGRAFINĖS LIETUVOS RYTINĖS IR PIETINĖS SIENOS". Karys (in Lithuanian).
• Hesch, Michael (1933). Letten, Litauer, Weissrussen (in German). Wien.
• Sutkus, Darius (2020a). "Litvinizmas: istorija, prielaidos, perspektyvos". Karys (in Lithuanian). 1: 3–9.
• Sutkus, Darius (2020b). "Litvinizmas II: Baltarusija – ideologinės kovos laukas". Karys (in Lithuanian). 2: 4–10.
• Dubonis, Artūras (2005). "Saldus lietuvių gyvenimas "svetimu pasu"" (PDF). Naujasis Židinys-Aidai (in Lithuanian).
• Dubonis, Artūras (2016). "The Prestige and decline of the official (state) language in the Grand Duchy of Lithuania (fifteenth-sixteenth century): problems in Belarusian historiography". Lithuanian Historical Studies. 20: 1–30. doi: 10.30965/25386565-02001002 . S2CID   217985575.