Could any other Balts "pull a Lithuania"?

[ctesiphon]

Well. Why was it Lithuania (specifically the region around Vilnius and Trakai) that played this role? I say one reason would be its location close to Ruthenia, which had to enable some sort of cultural transfer. At the same time it was relatively safe from the crusaders - before the orders reached them they had to conquer Prussia and Courland, which bought them time the Prussians, for instance, dind't have. A third benefit their location gave them was good access to the divided and better developed Ruthenian principalities, which were ripe for conquest. Prussia or Courland didn't have that. I don't have the data, but it's also likely that the demographic potential of Upper Lithuania was greater than that of Courland or Livonia.

I think Lithuanians were best positioned by far to create a large state in the region, but perhaps some other group could do the same, if external conditions were better for them. Maybe Sudovians, or Prussians if there's no Teutonic Order.

 

[Dyranum]

Yes, the Lithuanians did utilise the Prussians as a buffer. They funded Prussian rebels for example.

However, does the proximity with the Kievan Rus' play that huge of a role? The Estonians also bordered Rus', as did the Livonians, Selonians, and Latgallians.

Admittedly, Lithuania had a larger population base and territory than the other Balts when they managed to unite, but what else separated Lithuania from the others?


As for the Teutonic Order...well, there's still Poland as a threat, though the Prussians routinely beat all Polish incursions.