Category talk:Nobility of Belarus

Belarusian nobility: This is the official website of the Association of the Belarusian Nobility + Belarusian Nobility DNA Project etc. --Kazimier Lachnovič (talk) 20:06, 13 March 2022 (UTC)

Moreover, here are the documentary evidence (as a one example) that with the beginning of Belarusian statehood in 1917, many representatives of noble families of the Grand Dutchy of Lithuania defined themselves as Belarusians. --Kazimier Lachnovič (talk) 20:14, 13 March 2022 (UTC)

To stop the wasting of time (especially after clearly chauvinistic threatening "I will try to completely remove this category"), it is quite enough to have a look at the search results for "Belarusian nobility" in Google books: [1]. --Kazimier Lachnovič (talk) 20:25, 13 March 2022 (UTC)

There used to be the term "Belarusian nobility" in Poland. This term defined the Polish nobility living in the land of White Ruthenia. The fact that they lived in the territories of White Ruthenia did not make them what the word Belarusian currently means. Similarly: there was a term "Greater Poland nobility", but they were not Greatpolans, they were simply Polish nobility living in Greater Poland.

It seems to me, like you interpret the term "Belarusian nobility" in your own way, so you can assign the rights of present-day Belarus to the Polish nobility living in the territory of White Ruthenia.

To attribute the Polish nobility to present-day Belarus is a mere historical lie, not chauvinism. Please stop these pathetic manipulations.

There are no historical documents showing that the nobility living in what is now Belarus considered themselves as Belarusians. Due to historical distortions, the present-day Belarusians try to ascribe to themselves a history that does not belong to them.

Please provide historical sources supporting your thesis. The fact that you sent me a link to a page with a list of the so-called "Belarusian nobility" means nothing. Guccee (talk) 12:10, 14 March 2022 (UTC)

No. "Belarusian nobility" doesn't mean "nobility of White Ruthenia", which is quite clear from the name "Belarusian", not "White Ruthenian" or "whiteruthenian". This is also clear from the reliable source provided in the google books, e.g. [2], [3], [4], [5], [6], [7], [8], [9], [10], [11] etc. --Kazimier Lachnovič (talk) 14:36, 14 March 2022 (UTC)

More and more you reassure me that you have no idea what you are talking about. Why did you use English-based vocabulary as a counter-argument? English has nothing to do with the history of the topic we are discussing.

"White Ruthenia" in Polish means "Biała Ruś" - BIAŁO-RUŚ, BELARUS. "Białoruś" means Belarus.

All the texts you mentioned contain informations about "Belarusian nobility", but what kind of nobility is it? Who was that nobility? Belarusian nobility are only the Boyars, who were virtually absent among the nobility of the Commonwealth. So I do not know for what reason you place Polish noble families in the category of Belarusian nobility. History confirms, that in the Commonwealth were only those boyar families that were admitted to Polish families during the Union of Horodel in 1413. This means that at the same time these families became Polish nobility.

I am the part of the nobility who came from Belarus as well, but I live in Poland and speak Polish. My ancestors and me - do not want to be identified with Belarusians just because we once lived in that area. At least not present Belarusians with whom we have nothing to do. Guccee (talk) 15:29, 14 March 2022 (UTC)

First and last, in English "Belarusian" means belonging to or relating to Belarus, its people, or its language. Do not confuse English with Polish. Moreover, the name "nobility of Belarus" (in contrast to "Belarusian nobility") is related to the noble families which lived or had property (land) on the territory of modern Belarus, any national relation to present Belarusians isn't implied here. So your attempts to present Belarus as a part (a province) of Poland is a example of poor and very dangerous behavior, that can have very bad consequences. Second, if you are such an expert in the question you are trying to look like, you should know perfectly that according to the Lithuanian Statute, any nobles from Poland couldn't have any property in the Grand Dutchy of Lithuania. So the majority of Lithuanian (in historical meaning) noble families have the same origins with the present Belarusians. So the decision to leave own people alone with the Russian occupants (just because their current official name "Belarusians" is not what they should had historically) is just a coward and pathetic act of betrayal. --Kazimier Lachnovič (talk) 11:42, 15 March 2022 (UTC)

I'm starting to notice that aside from not understanding the history itself, your problem is also gaps in understanding the English language as well.

As I mentioned before, English is not a main part of our discussion, because the topic of discussion has nothing to do with English. I used comparisons in Polish and the meaning of individual terms in Polish. Why did I do this? Because it is from the Polish language that the concept of "Belarusian nobility" comes from - that is, the one coming from the territories belonging to the former Rzeczpospolita. This concept has been present in historical works for centuries.

"The name nobility of Belarus (in contrast to Belarusian nobility) is related to the noble families which lived or had property (land) on the territory of modern Belarus, any national relation to present Belarusians isn't implied here." - I tried to explain exactly the same to you above.

I have never considered the present-day Belarus to be a province or part of Poland. Once again you do not understand what I am writing.

The Lithuanian nobility was the Polish nobility per lege (i.e. by law), and the Belarusian nobility existed according to the region. It was the native Polish nobility who accepted the boyars and princes of Lithuania and Ruthenia into their rights and privileges. These events officially made them Polish nobility.

"So the majority of Lithuanian (in historical meaning) noble families have the same origins with the present Belarusians." - yes, but it should still be called Lithuanian nobility. Although this is also not entirely true, due to what I wrote above.

Referring to the last part you wrote: I personally think that the present Belarusians are wonderful people, they are exactly the same as Poles in practically every sense of the word. But that is not our topic of discussion. I have many Belarusian friends. I'm just trying to clarify the history. Guccee (talk) 14:03, 15 March 2022 (UTC)

One more thing, do you know how long this part from the Lithuanian Statute existed in reality? Guccee (talk) 14:07, 15 March 2022 (UTC)

Since 2020, there have been several attacks on Belarusian identity in Wikimedia, some of them even succeed (like removal the article en:Pahonia). I have no objection about showing the unity of noble families in Rzeczpospolita Obojga Narodów (though the opposition between the Lithuanian nobility Litwini and the Polish one Koroniarzy was even in the 19th century). In my opinion the less controversial and ambiguous way (that do not provide any basis for the things I mentioned earlier) is using the common English name of the Republic, which is en:Polish–Lithuanian Commonwealth. Thus, adding the Category:Noble families of the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth to Category:Nobility of Belarus, Category:Nobility of Lithuania etc. could be a solution of our dispute. Especially since, in my opinion, now is not a good time for such disputes. --Kazimier Lachnovič (talk) 14:28, 16 March 2022 (UTC)