It is around 70percent accurate in my opinion: in our Lithuanian history books, dnieper balts are shown to cover all modern day Belarus plus modern day Kursk Bryansk Smolensko oblasts, but what happened to the dnieper balts is quite a mystery
There are toponyms and hydronyms that have connection with Lithuanian language deep inside Belarus territory and some even in Russia (most notably the city of Mozhaisk (lith.- ”mažai” – little), although obviously it’s not 100 % certain), where East Galindians (a Baltic tribe) migrated to and lived before getting assimilated to the local ethnoses.
More or less correct. The spread of the Baltic tribes is judged by the hydronyms that seem to have a Baltic origin. Hydronyms are a conservative layer of the language. They seem to suggest [the area of Baltic speakers in the past might have been somewhat wider](https://lt.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vaizdas:Baltic_hydronyms_location_map.png).
For example, there is a river [Nara](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nara_%28Oka%29) that is thought to have a Baltic name (cf. Narutis, Neris, nerti, narus). On this map it flows roughly between Moscow and Kaluga.
I saw that in a video about indoeuropean languages
Jūra į jūrą bitches
Balts were huge – formed 4000 years ago and dominated from Vistula in the west to Bug river in modern Poland in the south and to Volga river in modern Russia. The OP image shows a fraction of the earlier Balt areas.
Germans took out the Prussians way faster than in 1600. in 17th century. The last Prussian(and by that I mean a real Prussian, not a German who came to live there) died in 17th century, but they were as good as gone way earlier.
Also, the terminology here is not correct, because those prussian lands never were lithuanian, they were simply prussian. Lithuanians were only one of many baltic tribes which had Mindaugas kill many cousins of his and take the throne, hence that’s the name of the country right now. I don’t like the fact , that in this map, it looks like there were only 2 tribes, lithuanian and latvian, and it was way different. latvian teritory consisted of 2-3 different tribes, lithuanian teritory consisted of 6 tribes and kaliningrad has prussians.
I read “How big were the balls”
It is quite correct and missleading at the same time. There is always conquest, assimilation, splits or whatever throughout historry. Hell, Baltic aria was once inhabited by fino – ugrik people
11 comments
It is around 70percent accurate in my opinion: in our Lithuanian history books, dnieper balts are shown to cover all modern day Belarus plus modern day Kursk Bryansk Smolensko oblasts, but what happened to the dnieper balts is quite a mystery
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e8IK-mDQjag&t=1s](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e8IK-mDQjag&t=1s) idk if its accurate, just have seen this on yt recently
There are toponyms and hydronyms that have connection with Lithuanian language deep inside Belarus territory and some even in Russia (most notably the city of Mozhaisk (lith.- ”mažai” – little), although obviously it’s not 100 % certain), where East Galindians (a Baltic tribe) migrated to and lived before getting assimilated to the local ethnoses.
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Europa_Universalis_IV](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Europa_Universalis_IV)
This game might help you.
More or less correct. The spread of the Baltic tribes is judged by the hydronyms that seem to have a Baltic origin. Hydronyms are a conservative layer of the language. They seem to suggest [the area of Baltic speakers in the past might have been somewhat wider](https://lt.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vaizdas:Baltic_hydronyms_location_map.png).
For example, there is a river [Nara](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nara_%28Oka%29) that is thought to have a Baltic name (cf. Narutis, Neris, nerti, narus). On this map it flows roughly between Moscow and Kaluga.
I saw that in a video about indoeuropean languages
Jūra į jūrą bitches
Balts were huge – formed 4000 years ago and dominated from Vistula in the west to Bug river in modern Poland in the south and to Volga river in modern Russia. The OP image shows a fraction of the earlier Balt areas.
https://m.delfi.lt/delfi/article.php?id=7365788&=1
Germans took out the Prussians way faster than in 1600. in 17th century. The last Prussian(and by that I mean a real Prussian, not a German who came to live there) died in 17th century, but they were as good as gone way earlier.
Also, the terminology here is not correct, because those prussian lands never were lithuanian, they were simply prussian. Lithuanians were only one of many baltic tribes which had Mindaugas kill many cousins of his and take the throne, hence that’s the name of the country right now. I don’t like the fact , that in this map, it looks like there were only 2 tribes, lithuanian and latvian, and it was way different. latvian teritory consisted of 2-3 different tribes, lithuanian teritory consisted of 6 tribes and kaliningrad has prussians.
I read “How big were the balls”
It is quite correct and missleading at the same time. There is always conquest, assimilation, splits or whatever throughout historry. Hell, Baltic aria was once inhabited by fino – ugrik people