|This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects:|
The Jagiellons were a branch of the Gediminaiciai (Giedyminowicze), a dynasty which had ruled in Lithuania long before they came to Poland. I wonder if we should move this article to Gediminaiciai or create a separate one. I'm for the former solution, buy I want to hear other people's opinion. -- Kpalion 16:12, 16 Nov 2004 (UTC)
- Lepiej stworzyc odzielny, Jagiellonowie to "samodzielna" dynastia. Kazda dynastia wywodzi sie z innej lub szlachetnej rodziny, skladajac je wszystkie w kupe, wyladujemy u Adama i Ewy ;) --Emax 18:30, 16 Nov 2004 (UTC)
- Jeszcze jedna sprawa, czy symbol Gedymina byl symbolem polskich Krolow? Z tego co wiem Wladyslaw uzywal, ze tak to nazwe, (bo nie wiem jaka jest oficjalna nazwa) "krzyza" ktory jest obecnie na tarczy w Pogoni, ale nie slyszalem o tym by on lub inny Jagiellonczyk uzywal herbu Gedymina?--Emax 18:30, 16 Nov 2004 (UTC)
- I understand the Jagiellon dynasty is a branch of the Gediminaičiai dynasty. The Jagiellon dynasty is associated with Poland and then the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth after the Union of Lublin in 1569. Before the Union, Poland and Lithuania were politically separate, although they sometimes coincidentally had the same rulers due to "inheritance" of the throne, but sometimes they did not have the same rulers. Even if the rulers were the same, sometimes the dates of reign were different. Some of the Polish Kings in the Jagiellon dynasty before the Union, such as Ladislaus III and Jan Olbracht (John Albert), were not rulers in Lithuania. The Gediminaičiai dynasty is primarily associated with Lithuania and then the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth after the Union in 1569. Some of the Lithuanian rulers in this dynasty before the Union, such as Vytenis (relative of Gediminas), Švitrigaila, and Žygimantas I Kestutaitis (Sigismund I Kestutian), were not associated with Poland and are not mentioned in this article. Švitrigaila and Žygimantas I Kestutaitis were on the Kestutis/Vytautas (Lithuanian) side of the Gediminaičiai as opposed to the Jagiellon (Polish) side of the dynasty. My conclusion is that there should be a separate article on Gediminaičiai, which would mention those people not mentioned in this article. There should, of course, be references and links back and forth in both articles. An article in the Lithuanian section of Wikipedia already has an article on Gediminaičiai and material from there can be used to make the English version. Note the annotation on the č in Gediminaičiai when writing this article. H Padleckas 11:59, 21 Nov 2004 (UTC)
Alas, I don't understand Lithuanian. For the start I'll put here a table of Lithuanian and Polish names of the Lithuanian Gediminaičiai:
|Žygimantas Kęstutaitis||Zygmunt Kiejstutowicz|
|Kazimieras Jogailaitis||Kazimierz Jagiellończyk|
|Žygimantas Senasis||Zygmunt Stary|
|Žygimantas Augustas||Zygmunt August|
--Kpalion 16:45, 22 Nov 2004 (UTC)
I have a question to any Lithuanian speaker: is the Lithuanian name for the Jagiellonian dynasty Jogailaičiai, and is the other branch of the Gediminaičiai called Kęstutaičiai? --Kpalion 19:38, 22 Nov 2004 (UTC)
- I know Lithuanian. The answer to the above question is yes. The plural of the singular Jogailaitis is Jogailaičiai. A Jogailaitis is a family member or descendent of Jogaila.
The plural of the singular Kęstutaitis is Kęstutaičiai. A Kęstutaitis is a family member or descendent of Kęstutis. The plural of the singular Gediminaitis is Gediminaičiai.
A Gediminaitis is a family member or descendent of Gediminas. I might write this article, possibly with your help, Kpalion, when I have time, although I am somewhat busy these days. H Padleckas 00:50, 23 Nov 2004 (UTC)
- There was no such dynasties as 'Gediminaičiai' or 'Jogailaičiai'. It's artificial terms created in 20th century used only in Lithuanian historigraphy, because it's more easier for Lithuanians pronounce. There was no letter 'č' in Lithuanian scripts prior 20th century. In historical sources are found only Giedyminowicze, Гедиминочи (Gediminovichi) etc. Gediminaičiai - it's a linguistic reconstructions with aim present standard Lithuanian name in 14th century when standard Lithuanian not existed in 14th century! It's impossible (?..) know what was real name of Gedimin - maybe Gedminas or Gedmins. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 126.96.36.199 (talk) 10:42, 1 May 2008 (UTC)
- The Gediminaiciai were ethnically Lithuanians, so I think it is appropriate to leave this article under the existing title Gediminaiciai. English speakers are most likely to use the native Lithuanian words when referring to Lithuanians, I believe. However, you do have a point. I will create a redirect now from Gedimin dynasty to Gediminaiciai. H Padleckas 05:43, 2 Apr 2005 (UTC)
What makes you so certain that their true ethnicity was Lithuanian? All genealogy, as well as information about where they primarily resided, indicates that they were, and regarded Belorusian, as their primary language. They even allowed Lithuanian-speaking Samogitia to be taken by T.Knights.188.8.131.52 03:50, 28 May 2005 (UTC)
- Well, I think that the terms Gedimin dynasty or Gediminids are more likely to be used by non-Lithuanians. Also, such a name would be in accordance with the naming of other European dynasties here in WP: Piast dynasty, Jagiellon dynasty, Habsburgs, House of Windsor and so on. All these names follow the rules of English grammar, which cannot be said of Gediminaiciai. Halibutt 05:00, May 28, 2005 (UTC)
I remember seeing Bielski among the descendants of Algirdas. Is it the same branch? ++ just found this (Bielski) (linked from this). Marcin Bielski ? mikka (t) 23:16, 8 November 2005 (UTC) mikka (t) 23:16, 8 November 2005 (UTC)
cached from [www.bg.us.edu.pl/mariusz/genealogia/rody/bielscy01.html incative page] (discrepancies w.r.t. "Bielski" ext. link above):
- KSIĄŻĘTA BIELSCY
ks. Włodzimierz Olgierdowicz (†po X.1398); ks. kijowski 1362?-1395, kopylski 1395 i słucki
* A1. ks. Aleksander (Olelko) (†1454); ks. kopylski i słucki, ks. kijowski 1441; × [22.VIII.1417] Anastazja (†1470); po nim KS. OLELKOWICZE SŁUCCY * A2. ks. Iwan; 1422-1446; namiestnik Wielkiego Nowogrodu 1445-1446, ks. na Białej; × [ok. II.1422] Wasylissa ks. Holszańska (†p. 1484); (2°-v. ks. Michał Siemionowicz) o B1. ks. Iwan (Janusz); × Anna ks. Worotyńska o B2. ks. Siemion (†p. 1522); ks. na Białej, woj. moskiewski; × Irena [ojciec: ks. Iwan Juriewicz Patrikiewicz]; po nim POTOMSTWO o B3. ks. Fiodor (†po 1506); woj. moskiewski 1499; ×1  Anna, ks. kobryńska (†II/III.1519); (2°-v. Wacław Kostewicz); ×2 [I.1498] N + C1. ks. Dymitr (z drugiego; *1499 †11.I.1550); × Marta Iwanówna Czeladnina [ojciec: Iwan Andrejewicz Swibłow] # D1. ks. Iwan (†Moskwa 24.V.1571); × [8.XI.1555] Marta Wasylówna ks. Szujska (*1538 †2.X.1571) [ojciec: Wasyl Wasylowicz ks. Szujski] * E1. ks. Wasyl (†młodo) * E2. ks. Iwan (†młodo) * E3. ks. Fiodor (†młodo) * E4. ks. Anastazja (†młodo) * E5. ks. Anna # D2. ks. Eudoksja (†1573); × Michał Jakowlewicz Morozow (†1573) # D3. ks. Anastazja (†24.V.1571); × Wasyl Michajłowicz Zacharin Juriew (†3.IV.1567) + C2. ks. Iwan (z drugiego; †1541); × ks. N Michajłówna Szczeniatiewa [ojciec: ks. Michał Daniłowicz Szczeniatiew] # D1. ks. Iwan; × Anna Piotrowna Zacharina [ojciec: Piotr Jakowlewicz Zacharin] * E1. ks. Jerzy (†24.IX.1612); mnich pod imieniem Galakteona + C3. ks. Siemion (z drugiego; †po 1542) o B4. ks. Anna (†po 12.II.1490); × [28.I.1448] Bolesław II, ks. cieszyński (†8.X.1452) o B5. ks. N (córka); × Iwan ks. Ostrogski (†po 1465) o B6. ks. Jawnuta (Agnieszka) (†zapewne p. 1496); × Iwan Chodkiewicz, woj. kijowski (*ok. 1420 †ok. 1484) o B7. [?] ks. N (córka); × Dymitr ks. Odyncewicz * A3. ks. Andrzej (†ok. 1457); ks. na Ainie, Słoweńsku, Mohilnie, Kamieńcu, Łohojsku i Połonnym; × Maria * A4. ks. N (Anastazja?) (†1396); × [koniec 1384] Wasyl III, ks. kaszyńsko-krośniatyński (†po 1426)
- There were two princely families of this name, one Gediminid and another Rurikid from Yaroslavl. I will start an article about them later this week. The former genealogy was compiled by me from Russian sources. The latter is taken by Maruisz from the standard Polish reference, Włodzimierz Dworzaczek's Genealogia (1959). --Ghirlandajo 14:34, 9 November 2005 (UTC)
|Gediminas, Grand Prince of Lithuania||Giedymin|
|Jaunutis, Grand Prince of Lithuania||Jewnuta|
|Algirdas, Grand Prince of Lithuania||Olgierd|
|Jogaila, Grand Prince of Lithuania||Władysław Jagiełło|
|Kęstutis, Grand Prince of Lithuania||Kiejstut|
|Vytautas, Grand Prince of Lithuania||Witold (Witołd)|
|Švitrigaila, Grand Prince of Lithuania||Świdrygiełło|
|Žygimantas Kęstutaitis, Grand Prince of Lithuania||Zygmunt Kiejstutowicz|
|Kazimieras Jogailaitis, Grand Prince of Lithuania||Kazimierz Jagiellończyk|
|Aleksandras, Grand Prince of Lithuania||Aleksander|
|Žygimantas Senasis, Grand Prince of Lithuania||Zygmunt Stary|
|Žygimantas Augustas, Grand Prince of Lithuania||Zygmunt August|
To quote from the current article: "They were rulers of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania, which realm chiefly meant that of Lithuanians and Ruthenians, being at least half-Slavic."
This sentence is confusing at best. Does it mean to say that the realm of the grand Duchy of Lithuania was at least half-Slavic, or is it implied that Gediminaičiai were at least half Slavic? If the latter is the case, then I see it as an error - ruling a certain realm does not automatically imply that the ruler is of the same ethnicity as the realm (just consider the Bourbon dynasty while they were ruling Spain; they did not become Spanish just because of that). Of course, it might be that Gediminaičiai had Slavic blood, but this is not implied by them ruling a Lithuanian/Slavic country. In addition, some external links could be added that support the claims on the ethnicity and geneology of Gediminas. The problem with that is, of course, the fact that most of these links would probably be based on Polish sources, which tend to deflate any facts about Lithuania... Laiqua 21:09, 26 May 2007 (UTC)
The thing is that the so-called "Lithuanian language" didn´t exist till the end of XIX century and that the rulers of the Great Ducky of Lithuania, Rus and Samogitia were not speaking "Lithuanian". Actually the language used in justice, trade and science was Ruthenian (a slavic language similar to nowadays Belarusian) not "Lithuanian" (since such a language is a product of a group of Polish intellectuals who created the "Lithuanian nation", I am using here Gellner theories on nations and nationalism). So non of the rulers of "Lithuania" were "Lithuanians" as we known nowadays.
- The funny thing about all this rant is the "didn´t exist till the end of XIX century" part. If the Lithuanian language was "created in the 19th century" then the scholars would not say that our language is one of the oldest languages in the world. In addition, the Lithuanian language was the spoken language in the Grand Duchy of Lithuania until its expansion to the former Kievan Rus' lands. It was never the written language. Just because the Statutes were written in Ruthenian, that does not mean that Ruthenian is the "real Lithuanian" language. – Sabbatino (talk) 19:32, 1 August 2018 (UTC)
DNA Analysis of Modern Gediminids (moved from article)
The Rurikid Dynasty DNA Project seeks to study the male-line Y-chromosomal DNA of modern princely descendants of both Rurik and Gediminas, in order to establish the ethnic origins of both men, as well as determining the extent to which they may have been related to each other. In addition to modern princely descendants, the project also accepts participation from any men who think they may possibly be descended from either Rurik or Gediminas. The ideal situation would be for the actual bones of these dynasty-founders to be discovered, and to extract their Y-DNA for study. Unfortunately with Gediminas, his body was burned after his death, thereby destroying his DNA. Thus, the Rurikid Dynasty DNA Project is doing what it can, which is to try to establish a predominance of one Y-DNA haplotype over other haplotypes within the surviving princely lines as an indication of Gediminas' probable origins. Here is the state of the project, as of March 15, 2010, in the words of the project administrator, Dr. Andrzej Bajor:
"My private database is here http://freepages.genealogy.rootsweb.com/~mozhayski/teksty/ydna.html .
See also: Rurikid Dynasty DNA Project
"The database also includes Gediminid princes.
"Bogdan Korybut-Woroniecki was found to be descended from a Swedish or Norwegian Viking (genetic haplo I1a). However, experts of the Polish Association of Nobility don't believe that he is a genuine Gediminid prince. In my opinion he is descended from one of the native Lithuanian princes.
"Prince Tonu Trubetsky (he is a famous musician nicknamed Tony Blackplait) is descended from the Gediminid Trubetskoi princes. His family tree since Gedimin is well documented. He was found to be descended from the native Lithuanian population. And this seemed reasonable, since from Stryjkowski's chronicle (end of 16th century) it follows that the early Gediminid princes spoke Lithuanian as their native tongue. Alas, Tonu Trubetsky's branch was broken by someone in the past. Most probably an adoption unknown to historians occurred in this branch of the Trubetsky princes [Tonu Trubetsky is of the R1a1 haplotype]. Besides, this is what the Trubetsky princes wrote in Obshchiy Gerbovnik Rassiyskoi Imperii (Armorial of the Russian Empire, vol. 2, St. Petersburg 1798). That Gedimin was descended from St. Vladimir the Great of Kiev on the Polotsk branch seems to be uncertain from the point of view of true genetics. In spite of the lack of close blood relations between the Rurikids and the Gediminids, one may, however, think of "political" family relations, i.e., that both princely lines were related in another way to each other: namely, in the Suzdal Chronicle (Suzdalskaya Letopis') one can find a text dealing with the siege of Polotsk by St. Vladimir the Great of Kiev. From this it comes out, that ROGNEDA, the future wife of St. Vladimir, as well as mother of his sons, HAD HER OWN SON from her 1st MARRIAGE. It's then quite probable that IZIASLAV VLADIMIROVICH of POLOTSK was, in fact, AN ADOPTED SON of St. Vladimir.
"Prince Askold Georgievich Khovanskii, whose ancestors were genuine Gediminid princes in Russia, is... of Finno-Ugrian descent (N1c1). He matches well with Alex Chartorisky (Czartoryski) of Australia, whose family comes from Russia. They both match well with another Prince Trubecki (Trubetzkoi) of Canada, who, for the time being, doesn't wish to show his Y-DNA test result to the public. Their tests were later confirmed by the tests made by another Trubetzkoy of Russia and Galitzine (Golitsin) of Russia. Their genetic haplos depart from those of the Rurikids. By no means were the Gediminid princes descended from St. Vladimir of Kiev. Currently, it seems that the Gediminids and Rurikids shared a common male ancestor in the time of Jesus Christ, or slightly later [most modern Gediminid and Rurikid princes tested so far are of the Finno-Ugrian N1C1 Y-chromosomal haplotype].
"Nevertheless, the project is seeking other princes of Gediminid descent, such as Trubecki (Trubetskoi), Golicyn (Galitzine), Chowanski (Khovansky) and Kurakin (Kurakine). Others, such as Czartoryski, Sanguszko and Koriatowicz-Kurcewicz, are rarely met in the world anymore."Metsamies (talk) 15:16, 18 March 2010 (UTC)
- I think there will always be Lithuanian racistswho fight against any research results about Gediminas' origins.
in Karelia, Ingria etc
Dmitrijus Algirdaitis Vladimiras Algirdaitis