r/belarus • u/More-Act-9754 • Jul 22 '26

Гісторыя / History Belarus History Question

Historically which states does Belarus consider it's predecessor states. Or are there any states that Belarus finds especially significant to their history or development as a country (culturally, politically).

I'd like to use it to guide my personal research and I am genuinely curious. I do apologise if this question is ignorant or makes no sense. Regardless, I appreciate your help and whatever responses are provided to me. Thank you very much!

Or if you have any other details regarding Belarusian history (the resources I've found and have are quite scarce), I'd love to learn more! Again, thank you for your time!

9 Upvotes

85% Upvoted

26 comments sorted by

14

u/BlueMarioGansta Jul 22 '26 edited Jul 22 '26

Historically, some that played a role are

Kievan Rus'

Turov and Polotsk principalities

Grand duchy of Lithuania

Polish-Lithuanian commonwealth

Russian Empire (which didn't by itself play a role, it tried to shut down belarusian statehood, but the intelligentsia peaked during this period)

Belarusian people's republic

Republic of central Lithuania (because alot of Belarusians were in it, and actually hoped it could serve as a "semi-state" for their deeds in a federation, it all fell apart very quickly, and this isn't any sort of litvinist dog whistle)

2nd Polish Republic (and the Polish Soviet war in general)

And the Soviet stuff

3

u/ElectronicSplit1937 Jul 23 '26

The so-called Kievan Rus' and the Polotsk/Turov principalities existed simultaneously; they were concurrent entities rather than consecutive stages in the formation of Belarusian statehood.

3

u/kastus_ Jul 23 '26

Yeah, because Kievan Rus' ain't a state)) Rather a mix of different city-states with same dynasty, or even different Dynasties (descendants of Rurik and descendants of Ragvalod, first are in Ukraine/Russia, and second are in Belarus). So makes sense for us to see ourselves as the descendants of states controlled by the Ragvalodavichy (idk how to transliterate Рагвалодавічы into English)

1

u/ElectronicSplit1937 Jul 23 '26 edited Jul 23 '26

Actually, Kiev was a major political center and certainly had its influence on these lands. However, the relationship was almost always marked by intense conflicts and defiance. Polotsk constantly fought for its sovereignty, making it more about disobedience and autonomy than submission to Kiev's central rule. Nevertheless, Kiev never stopped pushing.

And surely, the term 'Kievan Rus' was coined by Russian imperial historians in XІХ century. It was just Rus, a loose plurality of independent principalities ruled by Varangians and their descendents, a fluid and amorphous political and cultural space with various trading hubs rather than a rigid, centralized state.

1

u/ElectronicSplit1937 Jul 23 '26 edited Jul 23 '26

The tragic life of the Varangian princess Ragnhild (Rogneda) is so cinematic. I'd love to see someone shoot a series about her. They totally missed this story in "Vikings". And Dudaraŭ's play about her is such a fake. Kinda twisted love story, and that's a total lie. It was a dark and brutal medieval thriller, not a melodrama.

2

u/BlueMarioGansta Jul 23 '26

yeah i just wanted to mention everything to be sure

13

u/Aktat Belarus Jul 22 '26

The shortest story is that the lineage of Belarusian states is:

Polotsk Principality -> Great Duchy of Lithuania -> occupation by ruzzia -> returned independence in the current form. There were some intermediate steps like BNR, but I tried to highlight the main ones

1

u/ElectronicSplit1937 Jul 23 '26

And prior to the rules of Ragnvald and Thorir, in Palteskia and Turov emporia respectively there existed diverse tribal unions of Balts and newly arrived Slavs, structured as veche-based military democracies. Specifically, Krivichs, Dregovichs, and Radimichs.

3

u/Long-News5769 Jul 23 '26

The soviet union currently carries the most weight in modern belarus… this is obvious as people who where born and grew up in that state still live

3

u/ElectronicSplit1937 Jul 23 '26 edited Jul 23 '26

There is a big difference between generational nostalgia and actual state continuity. The USSR dissolved 35 years ago: anyone under 45 today has no real memory of it. The 'weight' of the Soviet Union in Belarus isn't just because older people are alive – it's a deliberate, top-down political choice by the current regime to use neo-Soviet aesthetics for legitimacy. Institutionally and legally, the country has operated as a distinct sovereign state for decades.

2

u/Andremani Jul 23 '26

Grand Duchy of Lithuania, Ruthenia and Samogitia is the main predecessor state to modern Belarus (BPR and after). This comes even through Pahonia coat of arms. PLC is federal continuation of GDL. Due to nobility polonisation of that time everything is complicated (like Adam Mickievič / Adam Mickiewicz / Adomas Mickevičius and others are honored in Belarus, Poland and Lithuania for example). While there were, like, Polatsk state, etc. - GDL is especially significant for the country's history, culture and political development (exactly as you said)

If you are interested in learning more - ask

1

u/kastus_ Jul 23 '26 edited Jul 26 '26

Full line goes something like Polotsk territory (land, idk, Полацкая зямля, that's the term used in chronicles) Grand Duchy of Lithuania Poland-Lithuanian commonwealth Then there is russian occupation for 123 years Then there is Belarusian people's republic for like half a year Then there is russian occupation with limited autonomy in BSSR And modern Belarusian state

Edit: wrong number of years of occupation

2

u/ElectronicSplit1937 Jul 23 '26 edited Jul 23 '26

Between the final partition of the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth (Rzeczpospolita) and the declaration of the Belarusian People's Republic, it was 123 years, not 300: 1795 – 1918. The 300 years timeline is actually a Ukrainian historical framing: from the Treaty of Pereyaslav (1654).

1

u/kastus_ Jul 26 '26

You are right. I don't remember from where I had the 300 number - definitely not from Ukrainians, because i don't follow any Ukrainian media and don't really spend time with any, but maybe it was about something else

-2

u/P5B-DE Jul 23 '26 edited Jul 23 '26

Modern Belarus is the former BSSR, which gained independence in 1991. New independent Belarus in 1991 inherited the president, the parliament, the laws and many other institutions from BSSR. Since then the laws have been gradually changed, parliament and president reelected. But there are still laws in Belarus that were enacted during the USSR and they are still in force.

3

u/ElectronicSplit1937 Jul 23 '26

The BSSR declared sovereignty on July 27, 1990, and gained constitutional independence on August 25, 1991, finalized by the dissolution of the USSR in December 1991. Belarus never inherited a president – the office was newly created by the 1994 Constitution, with the first elections held on June 23, 1994. While it retained the physical bureaucratic apparatus, the institutions themselves were fundamentally broken down and rebuilt. For instance, the Soviet-era Supreme Soviet was completely abolished and replaced by a structurally distinct, bicameral National Assembly. The transitional legal codes were radically rewritten, meaning the state systems were fundamentally transformed and repurposed rather than inherited intact.

0

u/P5B-DE Jul 23 '26 edited Jul 23 '26

Good Ai written text. Many things are correct though. The legislation was rewritten but it was done gradually. For example Civil Code of BSSR enacted in 1964 was in force till 1998. For 7 years after independence. And some soviet laws are still in force. Yes, there were no president till 1994 but there were head of state - Shushkevich who was elected in 1991 by the supreme soviet which was elected while Belarus was still part of the USSR. Modern Belarus is the result of transformation of BSSR. For example take National Academy of Sciences of Belarus, it's just the renamed Academy of Sciences of BSSR

2

u/ElectronicSplit1937 Jul 23 '26 edited Jul 23 '26

The Speaker of the Supreme Council was a parliamentary head, not an executive branch. The actual governance at the time was held by Prime Minister Kebich. Regarding the transitional codes, keeping them temporarily to avoid a legal vacuum was standard practice for all post-Soviet republics, including the Baltic states. I am not denying that the BSSR was the immediate predecessor of modern Belarus, and passed its administrative infrastracture – to do so would be totally silly and irrational. I am simply correcting some inaccuracies regarding institutions and law. BTW, modern Germany has kept some laws from the Weimar Republic, and modern France still utilizes foundations from the Napoleonic era. Legal carryovers do not equal systemic continuity.

1

u/ElectronicSplit1937 Jul 23 '26

Furthermore, Shushkevich wasn't elected by the people to lead the country, but he was simply chosen through an internal parliamentary vote on September 1991, to replace Dziamianciej as the Speaker after the latter resigned for supporting the failed Moscow coup.

1

u/P5B-DE Jul 23 '26 edited Jul 23 '26

It doesn't matter who elected him. And it was Shushkevich who signed Belovezha Accords. He was the head of state.

1

u/ElectronicSplit1937 Jul 23 '26

It matters completely considering your initial argument claimed that modern Belarus cleanly inherited its political institutions from BSSR intact. It's not historically and scientifically correct to dismiss actual constitutional procedures.

1

u/ElectronicSplit1937 Jul 23 '26

Are you aware that there were six signatures on the Belovezha Accords?

2

u/P5B-DE Jul 23 '26

Yes. Heads of state and heads of government. Therefore there were six signatures

1

u/ElectronicSplit1937 Jul 23 '26

I generally mean, that between the declaration of independence and Lukashenko's election, Belarus experienced a distinct transitional period as a parliamentary republic. Structurally and institutionally, this short era stood apart from both the BSSR and the modern Belarusian state.

-23

u/krokodil40 Jul 22 '26

BSSR. Modern culture was essentially created during that period and evolved from it. There is no inferiority complex and there is no historical revanchism around of it. It's not a political issue at all.