Military Review

"Ukrainians" are the same Russians

185
"Ukrainians" are the same Russians In Ukraine, they are still trying to create historical the myth of the "ancient Ukrainian people" and the state "Ukraine-Russia." President of Ukraine Petro Poroshenko said that the head of Russia, Vladimir Putin, in France, "in front of all of Europe tried to kidnap" Princess Anna Yaroslavna. At the same time, her father Yaroslav the Wise Poroshenko called "the ancient Ukrainian prince."


Moreover, in medieval Europe they did not know “Ukrainian princes and princesses”. In the monastery of St. Vincent founded by Anna in 1065 (Saint Vincent Abbey) in Senlis near Paris in front of the chapel in the 17th century, her sculpture was installed with a small model of the temple she founded in her hand. The inscription on the cap read: “Anna the Russian, Queen of France” (French “Anne de Russie Reine de France”). True, the history is gradually being corrected in the direction necessary for the owners of the West - in 1996, the inscription under the statue was changed to "Anna of Kiev, Queen of France."

We must remember that the state was Rus, the Russian land, the princes were all Russian, their children were also Russian. Even in Galicia, which has recently become a stronghold of "Ukrainians", before the seizure of this territory by Lithuania and Poland, the Russian princes ruled. And the most famous Galician prince Daniel Romanovich was considered the "King of Russia", and not "Ukraine". As for the First World War, the majority of Galicians considered themselves Russians, and this self-consciousness was corroded only by the cruelest terror. That Kiev is the ancient capital of the Russian state, and without Great Russia and separately from Russia is unthinkable in any way and in no way. Sooner or later, the two parts of Russia, the Russian land (Great and Little Russia) and the super-ethnos of the Rus will be united again.

It must be remembered that the West and South Russian lands were the yoke of Poland. They didn’t like the words “Russia” and “Russian” very much, therefore, at first, the Poles called the conquered Russian lands the Greek name “Little Russia”, Little Russia ”. Then they began to call it “the Outskirts-Ukraine”, that is, the outskirts of the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth (Great Poland), which occupied the vast Russian lands. In the end, the words “Ukraine” and “Ukrainians” were legalized. Although Little Russia, Kyiv region is one of the historical ethnocultural, linguistic cores of the Russian civilization and the Russian super-ethnos.

More at the turn of the XIX - XX centuries. the concept of "Russian" meant Great Russians, Little Russians and Belarusians combined. Great and Small Russia (Rus), Belaya Rus - these were three areas of settlement for Russians, and not for three different peoples, as the enemies of the Russian people are trying to prove. Nowadays, it is politically correct to talk about three nations - Russians (Great Russians tried to strike out during the Soviet period), Ukrainians and Belarusians. But such ethnic groups never existed! Geographic, historical areas - Little, Great and White Russia - never carried in themselves ethnic, national content. All these are territories inhabited by Russian people, who happened to be in the disintegration of the ancient Russian people and the Western occupation in different states.

Neither Great, nor Little, nor White Russia existed in the period of the Old Russian state. The concepts of “Small” and “Great” Rus appeared only in the XIV century, and did not have ethnographic, national significance. So, in Constantinople, Byzantium, from where the Russian church was ruled, subordinated to the Constantinople Patriarchate, the units of the previously united Russia were called. Metropolitans appointed to Russia were called the metropolitans of "All Russia" and the residence was Kiev, the capital of the Russian state. The situation changed when the Russian lands began to be seized by the Lithuanian princes and the Polish kings. Galitskaya Russia had fallen before everyone else and in order to distinguish it from the rest of Russia, which was called “Great”, it was called “Little Russia” (or “Little Russia”) in Byzantium. Then came the turn of the rest of the territories of southern Russia. From the Byzantine documents, these concepts penetrated into the Russian, Polish and Lithuanian. At the same time, before 1697, the government of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania (in fact, the Russian state, composed of Russian lands and populated by 80-90% by Russian people) used the Russian language in official documents. There were no national differences between Russians in “Great Russia and“ Little Russia ”. When, after the annexation of a part of Little Russia and Belorussia, Tsar Alexei Mikhailovich began to be called “All Velikii and Little and White Russia as an autocrat”, this expressed the idea of ​​uniting the entire Russian people who lived in the lands that once belonged to Ancient Russia and received various names after its collapse.

The concept of the "three Russians" was tenacious and existed until 1917. Only the Bolsheviks created two new statehood - Ukrainian and Belarusian. At the same time, two new “nations” - “Ukrainians” and “Belarusians” were artificially separated from the Russian super-ethnos; they created the Ukrainian SSR and the BSSR. Although at the turn of the XIX — XX centuries, ordinary people, as in the times of Ancient Rus, Svyatoslav Igorevich and Alexander Yaroslavich, used one ethnonym for their national self-determination - the Russians. This was characteristic of all Russians, wherever they lived, in Little, White or Great Russia. The concept of the "three nations" (future "fraternal peoples") existed only in a narrow stratum of the intelligentsia, where they were “sick” with revolutionary ideas and nationalism.

Representatives of the intelligentsia emphasized the differences in life, customs, and regional dialects. These regional differences proved the existence of the "three branches" of the Russian people, and then the three separate "fraternal East Slavic peoples." But today it has reached the point that “Ukrainians” have been declared “true heirs” of Kievan Rus, and Russians have been declared “a mixture of Finno-Ugrians and Mongols” who have no relation to the ancient history of the “Kiev state”. It should be noted that following this scheme, according to the artificial division of the Russian superethnos, it is easy to distinguish Pomorians, various Cossacks, Siberians, Muscovites, etc. And such work is being consistently carried out, the Big Game continues! And earlier, in the XVII-XIX centuries, it was possible to distinguish into separate "peoples" —Ryazanians, Novgorodians, Pskovs, Tverichs, etc. — all Russian inhabitants of individual Russian states and lands. They all had their own characteristics in everyday life, customs, dialect, etc.

The real national catastrophe of the Russian superethnos occurred after the 1917 year, when the internationalist revolutionaries who dominated national politics before the 30s (despite some mitigations that I. Stalin could carry out), in a directive order renamed "three Russian nationalities" ( also a false scheme) in the "three fraternal peoples". In one fell swoop, the Russianness of the two parts of a single superethnos of the Rus (Russians) was destroyed. Little Russia and Belarusians have lost their former Russianness, and the Little Russia also turned into a new nation - "Ukrainians". This cunning operation led to the fact that with one blow the number of the Russian people was reduced by a third! Russian left only the former "Great".

Another catastrophe occurred in 1991, when every “brotherly nation” was singled out in a separate republic. In the USSR, especially when the Stalinist regime subdued nationalistic tendencies, all the same, national distinctions did not exaggerate, they created a community of “Soviet people”. From this time on, the Ukraine (Malaya Rus) was completely freed by the Bandera-Nazis, who turned out to be convenient tools in the hands of thieving oligarchic groups-families oriented toward selling off, robbery- “privatization” of national wealth created by the works of many generations of Russian and Soviet people. When the masters of the West began to kindle a fire of the Fourth World War (in the form of a series of revolutions, revolts, local conflicts developing into regional ones like Iraq and Syria), Ukraine became a convenient springboard for creating the “Ukrainian Front”, undermining the stability of the Russian Federation, the entire post-Soviet space and Europe. And the Ukrainian "elite" - thieves-oligarchs, got the opportunity to complete the robbery of the people (with the withdrawal of the remaining assets to the West), they say, the war will write off everything. At the same time, it is possible to establish a fascist regime, hiding behind “aggression from the East” and drowning any dissatisfaction in the blood (as in Odessa and in the Donbas).

Hence, the origins of the current tragedy of Little Russia (Ukraine), where the situation reached the Russian-Russian war to the delight of the enemies of Russian civilization and the people. Where Kiev is the ancient Russian capital, is occupied by the pro-Western gangster regime, performing the installation of the West. Leading linguistic, ethnocultural, socio-economic, criminal genocide of the Russian people of Little Russia. The masters of the West and Kholuy, the thieves' regime in Kiev, perform the task of destroying and dismembering the Russian ethnos, of bleeding Russians with Russians, in order to destroy the still existing young passionary part of the population in mutual slaughter, part - to make them flee to Europe as white slaves and elderly lime by socio-economic genocide (“liberal reforms”, “optimization”). At the same time, all the existing signs of the common Soviet and Russian past, history, culture and language are destroyed.

Thus, we must remember that the “Ukrainians”, ultimately, are the same Russians (southern Rus), and separating them from the Russian superethnos is an artificial phenomenon, initiated by the enemies of the Russian people, striving for the dismemberment and destruction of Russia, the Russian civilization and our great nation. The purpose of such a dismemberment is obvious - the ethnocultural, linguistic genocide of the Russian superethnos, the solution of the “Russian question” by the masters of the West, when some Russians (who are told that they are a different people) are pitted against others.

The strategic goal of all Russians (in Little, White and Great Russia) is a single development project based on social justice and ethics of conscience, the unity of Russian super-ethnos within the framework of one statehood.
Author:
185 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. The comment was deleted.
  2. Amurets
    Amurets 1 June 2017 05: 16
    +8
    It must be remembered that the West and South Russian lands turned out to be the yoke of Poland. They really did not like the words of Russia and Russian, therefore, at first the Poles called the conquered Russian lands the Greek name "Little Russia", Little Russia ". Then they began to call it “Outskirts-Ukraine”, that is, the outskirts of the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth (Great Poland), which occupied huge Russian lands.

    Oh, how impatient Poroshenko and his decent again become a Polish cattle.
    1. Finches
      Finches 1 June 2017 05: 52
      17
      This is understandable to a normal, educated person, and the law has not been written to fools! laughing
      1. Kolya
        Kolya 1 June 2017 09: 24
        17
        I wish the author of the article would tell the Kremlin who the Russians are. Indeed, in Russia there are no Russians according to Kremlin policy. As they say, they would start with themselves. That is why Putin is already laughed everywhere that he betrays something that he himself does not recognize.
        1. Standard
          Standard 1 June 2017 19: 27
          +1
          Quote: Kohl
          After all, there are no Russians in Russia according to Kremlin policy

          According to the policy.
          However, when he was President of the Russian Federation, Medvedev answered the question about the Russian republic quite correctly: Russians have a republic. It is called the Russian Federation.
          And here is the next question: why did non-indigenous cadres manage this Russian republic? They chose not to ask. Since the first number in non-indigenous now are not Jews at all, but Ukrainians.
          And they themselves will not be torn from power. And the Russians are invited to consider them also Russian (one people). And be satisfied with this.
          1. Kolya
            Kolya 1 June 2017 22: 38
            +1
            It was you who at the meeting of the Jewish community came up with the idea that such an idea needs to be disseminated in order to completely divide the Russians, to expel immigrants from Ukraine from power and take their places?
      2. Red dwarf
        Red dwarf 1 June 2017 12: 11
        +5
        It is clear that there are few Russians in Ukraine, as well as in Belarus and Russia, why .. Yes, because, Jews, Poles, Tatars, Balts, Caucasians, Moldovans, etc. are not Russians, but they are mixed with Russians the vast majority in the three fraternal countries, if we say that they are Russian-speaking, then yes it is true, but they are not Russian by nationality.
        1. vovanpain
          vovanpain 1 June 2017 12: 43
          18
          Quote: Red dwarf
          them and mixed with the Russians the vast majority in three fraternal countries

          My dear man, explain to me ignorant if my father is Russian, my mother is Ukrainian, and my wife is Tatar, then the question is: Who are my children by nation? I do not advise offending. yes
          1. Alikos
            Alikos 1 June 2017 15: 18
            +5
            Quote: vovanpain
            Quote: Red dwarf
            them and mixed with the Russians the vast majority in three fraternal countries

            My dear man, explain to me ignorant if my father is Russian, my mother is Ukrainian, and my wife is Tatar, then the question is: Who are my children by nation? I do not advise offending. yes

            By whom a person feels in spirit.
            And you are ours! )))
            Ukrainians are also our people. But in the western Ukraine, a mixture of Judeo-Hungarian rabble has always spoiled Russia since the hell knows what time.
            Unfortunately, the Russian authorities created the most favorable conditions at the expense of the normal Russian people, fed this rabble on their own and our heads, and now we got what we have.
            Warmed a snake around his neck
            1. Victor N
              Victor N 1 June 2017 17: 14
              0
              The authorities of the USSR. VKP (b) - CPSU.
              1. Pancir026
                Pancir026 1 June 2017 17: 29
                +3
                Quote: Victor N
                The authorities of the USSR. VKP (b) - CPSU.

                Is this what the students of the Ruins teach?
                We look at the gift card of the Russian rulers-http: //munich2011com.livejournal.com/1
                20419.html
                After watching, ukrotrollam should be silent.
                1. Standard
                  Standard 1 June 2017 19: 20
                  +1
                  Quote: Pancir026
                  gift card of Russian rulers

                  these are not gifts.
                  This Russian land can and must be taken.
                2. ura-banzai
                  ura-banzai 1 June 2017 21: 07
                  +2
                  After watching, ukrotrollam should be silent. [/ Quote]
                  The person spoke out whether you can agree or not and stopping your mouth is a separate issue in your upbringing.
          2. Standard
            Standard 1 June 2017 19: 19
            +2
            Quote: vovanpain
            my wife is a Tatar, then the question is, Who are my children by nation?

            Tatars
            1. alexxxz
              alexxxz 2 June 2017 10: 25
              0
              Is this an example of Jewish logic? Is it a fig if mother is Tatar and father is Russian, then are children of Tatars? In Russia, the patriarchal structure of society, which means that paternal relationships are maintained. Including ethnic identity.
          3. Boris55
            Boris55 1 June 2017 19: 31
            +4
            Quote: vovanpain
            My dear man, explain to me ignorant if my father is Russian, my mother is Ukrainian, and my wife is Tatar, then the question is: Who are my children by nation ?:

            You are Russian and your children are Russian because our pedigree is on the male line.
            If your mother were Jewish, you would be Jewish, but your children would be Tatars.
            1. cost
              cost 2 June 2017 00: 17
              +2
              If from a pre-revolutionary Cossack point of view, your children are yarmaks, but this is not nationality, but the village name of the Russian-Tatar Cossack children. And all of them would be considered natural Cossacks. The nameplate, estate, religion, etc. were indicated in the passport book of the Republic of Ingushetia. nationality columns among citizens of the Russian Empire - JUST DID NOT EXIST

              in the foreign passports of the citizens of the Republic of Ingushetia there was also no column nationality, only citizenship was indicated - the Republic of Ingushetia. Here is the passport of the famous Kuban Cossack chamber Timofei Yashchik
              1. alexxxz
                alexxxz 2 June 2017 09: 09
                +1
                I may misunderstand something in the world order ... But in the second picture in column 4 it says "Nationality" and in this column the Cossack says - "Russian". Is not it so?
                1. cost
                  cost 2 June 2017 09: 21
                  +1

                  This column indicates citizenship
                  A column of nationality would be written like this: different nationality
                  1. alexxxz
                    alexxxz 2 June 2017 09: 40
                    0
                    Ege gay! Do not distort so clearly! On your picture, it says "different nationality - different nationality", where the word "different" - obviously, means "different, different", which means "nationality" - means "NATIONALITY". What is your absurd attempt to confuse the obvious and pass it off as unbelievable?
                    1. cost
                      cost 2 June 2017 10: 08
                      +1
                      Why juggle. On the internal passports of the columns, nationality did not exist at all, then with what fright it should appear on the passport. Box has a foreign passport of a member of the imperial court. Some kind of filpers. But the usual foreign passport of the Republic of Ingushetia, for example, Larisa Kvitko (Lesya Ukrainka), there are also no columns of nationality - the Russian-citizen is written
                      1. alexxxz
                        alexxxz 2 June 2017 10: 17
                        0
                        So what? What does this example of yours say? NOTHING ABOUT !!! Your logic in relation to ancient documents is not applicable from the word "AT ALL"! Such was the form of the document of the Cossack Box. This is a historical fact. Documented fact. Count was. The column is "Russian". All your conclusions are vile insinuations. Vile from denying an obvious historical fact. Why fantasize something ???
                      2. alexxxz
                        alexxxz 2 June 2017 10: 18
                        0
                        And yes. In this picture there is only one spread of the document. What is indicated on other U-turns is a mystery covered in darkness.
                  2. alexxxz
                    alexxxz 2 June 2017 09: 45
                    0
                    Well and more ... I will tell you a terrible military secret! The word "Russian" means nothing more than "Russian"! Not Russian !!! Not "Soviet", namely RUSSIAN !!!
                    1. alexxxz
                      alexxxz 2 June 2017 09: 46
                      0
                      And this is clear even to the border dog Alom. And do not try to bring the scientific base under your erroneous garbage!
                      1. cost
                        cost 2 June 2017 10: 18
                        +1
                        I agree, judging by the seals, the Box's passport is not a RI foreign passport, but a Danish passport, so nationality is indicated there.
                        But, on the Russian passports of RI nationality was not indicated
          4. Weyland
            Weyland 2 June 2017 22: 23
            0
            Quote: vovanpain
            Who are my children by nation?


            If purely genetically - the sons of the semi-Russian semi-Tatars, daughters - semi-Ukrainian semi-Tatars.
        2. Standard
          Standard 1 June 2017 19: 30
          +2
          Quote: Red dwarf
          there are few Russians in Ukraine, as well as in Belarus and Russia, why.

          So it’s not enough .... The mono-ethnic state quietly scratched itself (more than 80% of one ethnic group in the population).
        3. Sasha333
          Sasha333 3 June 2017 05: 02
          0
          It is precisely that they are Russian, but not Russian. Russian and called all newcomers.
    2. NEXUS
      NEXUS 1 June 2017 09: 18
      +5
      Quote: Amurets
      Oh, how impatient Poroshenko and his decent again become a Polish cattle.

      What Polish he is ... he and his whole company are higher in the evolutionary ladder than amphibians have ever stood.
      1. Alikos
        Alikos 1 June 2017 15: 56
        +1
        Quote: NEXUS
        ...
        What Polish he is ... he and his whole company are higher in the evolutionary ladder than amphibians have ever stood.


        But even that is true!
        Erysipelas reminds one of a toad, malaria mosquitoes having drunk on a swamp
    3. The comment was deleted.
      1. Standard
        Standard 1 June 2017 19: 38
        +3
        [quote = ws.kotov] with the name "Ukraine" [/ quote]
        If you take a look at any chronicle, you will see only "Ukrainian lands" - always with a small letter, which meant only marginality. \\

        In the XIV Art. already identified the main features of the Ukrainian language. At the same time, the formation of the Russian and Belarusian languages ​​took place. [/ Quote] \
        Scream! Therefore, you and the publisher modestly remembered as K. Kiev, or what?
        In the 14th century, the language was SLAVIC. And in Kiev, only from under Batu, it certainly could not be Ukrainian.
        Well, if Russian.
        1. ws.kotov
          ws.kotov 1 June 2017 23: 27
          0
          Standard You carefully read what I wrote and where the quote came from? Again:

          Alexander Karpovich Kasimenko, HISTORY OF THE UKRAINIAN SSR
          For high school of the USSR. - November 1965, XNUMX
          This publication is intended for the general reader. It gives a popular and concise account of the history of the Ukrainian SSR from ancient times to the present day.
          While working on the book, the author used in general terms the research of Soviet historians, in particular the two-volume collective work “History of the Ukrainian SSR” (K. 1955, 1957), as well as an extensive range of primary sources.

          I quoted verbatim, based on scientific papers and, judging from the annotation, studies of Soviet historians, in particular the two-volume collective work “History of the Ukrainian SSR” (K. 1955, 1957), as well as an extensive range of primary sources.
          So take a look, and do not give valuable directions, giving out personal Wishlist for events that were not there. Do you give a link to this literature or are you able to master it yourself? In general, find any scientific work of the period of Soviet historians and read - all the same plus or minus.
          Do you trust science of the USSR? Or did the Great Guru say that now everything is not as it was before, and history immediately changed ?! fool
        2. ws.kotov
          ws.kotov 1 June 2017 23: 44
          0
          Standard, especially for you:
          Alexander Karpovich Kasimenko is not just an uncle, and not even Great Norma.
          It is just a scientist, historian, doctor of historical sciences (1955), professor (1961), public figure, lecturer and teacher. Laureate of the USSR State Prize.
          For participation in the creation of the “History of Cities and Villages of the Ukrainian SSR” in 26 volumes in 1976 he was awarded the USSR State Prize.
          Where is he to you? Standard
        3. ws.kotov
          ws.kotov 1 June 2017 23: 50
          0
          Quote: Norma
          Scream! Therefore, you and the publisher modestly remembered as K. Kiev, or what?

          This is literally from the original! Open the book and see how it is printed. Abbreviations are not mine but publishers, i.e. according to GOST of that period.
          And what is Umora now? You calm down, dear.
      2. Dude
        Dude 1 June 2017 21: 51
        +1
        Another descendant of ancient ukrov in person!
        1. ws.kotov
          ws.kotov 1 June 2017 23: 34
          0
          Dude And you, as I understand it, that same great Russian aria with a thousand-year history.
          Although, "dude" is just "a man prone to ostentatious frivolity."
          Synonym - Schegol laughing
    4. svp67
      svp67 1 June 2017 18: 24
      +1
      Quote: Amurets
      Oh, how impatient Poroshenko and his decent again become a Polish cattle.

      Why cattle? No, he is following the Vishnevetsky’s route, but everything went awry somehow, but didn’t get it — he stumbled
  3. venaya
    venaya 1 June 2017 05: 17
    +8
    As for the reliability of information from Wikipedia, etc.:
    1. Basarev
      Basarev 1 June 2017 09: 55
      +2
      And why didn’t Anna join France to Russia? The very obvious step.
      1. ws.kotov
        ws.kotov 1 June 2017 15: 39
        +3
        Quote: Basarev
        why Anna didn’t annex France to Russia?

        She turned out to be smarter and wiser than some of the "Russian" land affiliates laughing
        1. svp67
          svp67 1 June 2017 18: 18
          +1
          Quote: ws.kotov
          She turned out to be smarter and wiser than some of the "Russian" land affiliates

          You are either more accurate, or the Security Service of Ukraine for Turchinov and his team may be offended ...
          1. ws.kotov
            ws.kotov 1 June 2017 23: 56
            0
            Quote: svp67
            and then the SBU for Turchinov and his team may be offended ...

            laughing
        2. igorserg
          igorserg 1 June 2017 19: 05
          +3
          If it weren’t for the "adherents" of Russia, there wouldn’t be any ... all attachments from sworn enemies (Polovtsy, Tatars, Mongols, Tatars), who periodically raided, and their principalities ... what would have happened if these crunches remained so far. Russia acted simply - united, but in the union it is easier to control than abroad. So we managed one, two uprisings and a citizen, otherwise the conflicts would have continued to this day.
      2. svp67
        svp67 1 June 2017 18: 17
        +2
        Quote: Basarev
        And why didn’t Anna join France to Russia? The very obvious step.
        Who would let her do this ... She could be able to take her head for it, as then they did not stand on ceremony. After all, it is to recognize Russia as the eldest. Franks would quickly suppress such "separatism"
    2. Standard
      Standard 1 June 2017 19: 39
      +1
      Poor Princess! in the provincials recorded! In the villagers ...
  4. inkass_98
    inkass_98 1 June 2017 06: 39
    12
    We don’t need to prove this, everything is fine in our heads, and with an infected hohloglist there is all evidence that peas are on the wall. The most important thing now is the struggle for future generations, they need to be directed in the right direction. And here the second-hand VNA horses have a huge advantage.
    1. Irbenwolf
      Irbenwolf 1 June 2017 07: 40
      +5
      Well, if it’s okay, then maybe for a start, stop calling these people - "Khokhlov"? By the way, when I was in Ukraine, no one systematically at the household level called the Russians either Katz Pami or Muscovites. The Russian language was called - Moscow mov.

      This was true before the Nazis arrived.
      1. inkass_98
        inkass_98 1 June 2017 07: 50
        16
        What kind of "these people" are these? Of people on that territory they are already called people, Ukrainians or Russians. And svidomye just struck hohloglistom, finally destroying the remnants of the brain. These are no longer people. Do you think the Nazis are people? So, even 70 years ago, they were recognized as criminals not subject to rehabilitation.
        1. Irbenwolf
          Irbenwolf 1 June 2017 09: 49
          +4
          These are those who live southwest of Kursk and Belgorod.

          I agree with this interpretation - the Nazis are ill with hohlostanstvo.
          And why did you decide that I consider fascists for people? The only thing is that it is difficult to consider normal people among the raging fascists. We do not have the Middle Ages and spend the Bartholomew’s night - it will not work. But this does not mean that ours are not there, or that they are all only on the territory of LDNR.

          Divide and conquer! It is necessary to separate Ukrainians from Ukrainians and the country itself will be transformed. She herself cannot do this. need help.
      2. Standard
        Standard 1 June 2017 19: 42
        +1
        Quote: IrbenWolf
        This was true before the Nazis arrived.

        Exactly.
        Not tired of being holier than the Pope?
        Are you waiting for the dill to spit in your face? So they (Ukrainians, Ukrainians, dill and other geeks) do exactly that for you.
  5. victorsh
    victorsh 1 June 2017 07: 17
    10
    Now you’ll pounce on me. But I don’t understand. I WOULD. Yes, a citizen of my favorite Russia. And although I’ll be a “pensioner”, if Rodina (Russia) gives the command “face” I’ll go to tear the villains as much as I can. But why should I refuse Yes, I still in childhood that grandfather Ivan (mother’s father), that grandfather Timofey (daddy) talked about my Cossack ancestors. And I don’t understand why we heroize the Don (Kuban) Cossacks and “poison” the Zaporizhzhya. -they are now in another state. But. "Khokhol" is like a Cossack on the Don. Some sow and plow the land, and at the first command of the Tsar-Father go to fight. Others are just peasants. Just Ukrainians-Little Russians are peasants. And the second. You just do not have to blame me for anti-Semitism. We "forgot" the 2014 year. The mayor of Kharkov at the beginning of the 14 year started "cool", we are Russian, and then he “surrendered” everyone. It only flashed in the Donbass. And it’s interesting that this is the only head of the largest city who didn’t “decommunize.” The Israelites can give me an answer, WHY?
    PSIf I live to see the next census in Russia, I’m sure that my son says that Ukrainians (unfortunately there are no Ukrainians) who are citizens of Russia will say that their daughter in the column is nationality.
    1. Olgovich
      Olgovich 1 June 2017 08: 01
      13
      Quote: victorsh
      If I live to see the next census in Russia, I’m sure that the son, Ukrainians will say that the daughter in the column is nationality


      Think about WHOM your great-grandfather and great-great-grandfather would write themselves in the nationality column.

      PS The answer is in the article.
      1. victorsh
        victorsh 1 June 2017 08: 39
        +4
        The answer is simple-Khokhol. One of the versions of this “self-name” is to distinguish “friend or foe” in battle “Sicheviks” didn’t have a form. And when they went to the enemy, mainly Tatars (who remember the eviction, but about the slave trade and betrayal during the "Crimean War" and WWII they prefer to remain silent. The Tatars were bald. And when you chop a bald saber or with a "friend or foe" crest. I was told like that. Do you have other facts, justify.
        1. Olgovich
          Olgovich 1 June 2017 09: 20
          10
          Quote: victorsh
          The answer is simple-crest


          And why not "Ukrainian", where did he go? Or rather, where did he come from?

          Sechiks NEVER called themselves "Ukrainians" and this is not a version, but a fact.
        2. Serg65
          Serg65 1 June 2017 09: 41
          14
          Quote: victorsh
          The answer is simple-crest

          My great-great-grandfather from near Poltava, in the 19th century was expelled to Minusinsk - considered himself Russian, great-grandfather is registered in the metric as Russian, my grandfather is also Russian with my father, and I have Russian nationality in my passport! wassat
    2. GUGA
      GUGA 1 June 2017 10: 37
      18
      Hello. The mother himself is a Kuban Cossack. He was interested in the history of the Cossacks. After the resettlement of the Cossacks in the Kuban, in the territory of modern Ukraine there were no Cossacks in the understanding as we understand it. Those who remained were transferred to the estates corresponding to their position. The last Zaporozhye Cossacks in the territory of modern Ukraine are Transdanubian Cossacks, who were disbanded in the mid-19th century and transferred to different classes. All the Cossacks who decided to remain Cossacks as an estate were basically relocated to the Kuban. By and large, only the memory and the word "Cossack" remained in Ukraine. The Cossacks, as an estate in Ukraine, died 150-200 years ago. Attempts by Ukrainian leaders to attribute to themselves the Cossacks and the right to the word "Cossack" evokes a smile and sarcasm in the Don and Kuban. On Don and sow the day you can meet the old adage: if you see a crest - kill, a crest is not a man. So a crest is definitely not a Cossack. As for the crest on the head, this is not the invention of the Cossacks. In ancient times they were worn by the Pechenegs and Polovtsy. During the invasions of Genghisides, they were squeezed out of the steppes and mainly settled (i.e., sheltered local princes) in the territory of modern Ukraine and Hungary.
      To consider Zaporizhzhya Cossacks as Ukrainians is fundamentally wrong. If you look at their censuses, then whoever there is not there: Little Russians, Russians, Tatars, Turks. Armenians, Jews (it seems that there was even one chieftain), there were even Poles. So this is still that "hodgepodge". But they all considered themselves to be Russian, they were Orthodox. Uniates were killed immediately, for betraying the faith. A slut or a Turk could spare, the Uniate immediately on the count. And now the most ardent "Cossacks" in Ukraine from the western regions - slaves and traitors to the faith are trying to ascribe to themselves the history of free Orthodox soldiers.
      1. victorsh
        victorsh 1 June 2017 13: 56
        +1
        you see a crest - kill, a crest is not a man.
        I can give my address. Are you trying? A man said, a man did. I WANT. I WAIT.
        1. Nagaibak
          Nagaibak 1 June 2017 21: 01
          +6
          victorsh "see a crest - kill, a crest is not a man."
          "I can give my address. Will you try? A man said, a man did. I WANT. I WAIT."
          I understand GUGA led the proverb.))) Why your comment is not clear.))) Well, they would write there ... a dumb proverb or ay.))) And I’ll give the address right away))) I’m waiting for an attempt.))) A man said a man did.))) Why and why are these cheap show-offs?)))
        2. kitamo
          kitamo 2 June 2017 08: 24
          0
          Quote: victorsh
          you see a crest - kill, a crest is not a man.
          I can give my address. Are you trying? A man said, a man did. I WANT. I WAIT.


          he didn’t say “find a crest and kill”, he said “see a crest - kill”, so if you want to measure your pipette, you have to go to him, show yourself ...
          laughing
        3. GUGA
          GUGA 2 June 2017 10: 54
          0
          Hello again. I didn’t want to offend or offend anyone. He brought an old saying, which is rare, but there is. In the Kuban there is no such saying; it is found only in old farms in the Don. At the moment, has a touch of sarcastic joke. I think it appeared from the time of Peter the Great, when the hetman Mazepa helped the tsarist army pacify the Bulavinsky uprising on the Don. They pacified brutally.
          The meaning of what I wrote is not in the old adage. I wanted to say that we need to study our history, and not to believe in replicated myths. In modern Ukraine, they try to ascribe to themselves a story that concerns them indirectly. At the heart of everything is taken by zapadestvo. But zapadentsy have to do with the Cossacks the same as the Litvinians, i.e. extremely indirect. But, oddly enough, it began under the Soviet regime. A clear bias in the history of the Kuban Cossacks towards the Zaporizhzhya Sich is direct proof of this. We flirted with the Ukrainians, wrote them a story. And it continues to this day. For thought: the Kuban Cossack army is 320 years old, the Cossacks settled the Kuban 220. Nestykovka, right?
      2. Alikos
        Alikos 1 June 2017 16: 10
        0
        Quote: GUGA
        Hello. The mother himself is a Kuban Cossack. He was interested in the history of the Cossacks. After the resettlement of the Cossacks in the Kuban, in the territory of modern Ukraine there were no Cossacks in the understanding as we understand it. Those who remained were transferred to the estates corresponding to their position. The last Zaporozhye Cossacks in the territory of modern Ukraine are Transdanubian Cossacks, who were disbanded in the mid-19th century and transferred to different classes. All the Cossacks who decided to remain Cossacks as an estate were basically relocated to the Kuban. By and large, only the memory and the word "Cossack" remained in Ukraine. The Cossacks, as an estate in Ukraine, died 150-200 years ago. Attempts by Ukrainian leaders to attribute to themselves the Cossacks and the right to the word "Cossack" evokes a smile and sarcasm in the Don and Kuban. On Don and sow the day you can meet the old adage: if you see a crest - kill, a crest is not a man. So a crest is definitely not a Cossack. As for the crest on the head, this is not the invention of the Cossacks. In ancient times they were worn by the Pechenegs and Polovtsy. During the invasions of Genghisides, they were squeezed out of the steppes and mainly settled (i.e., sheltered local princes) in the territory of modern Ukraine and Hungary.
        To consider Zaporizhzhya Cossacks as Ukrainians is fundamentally wrong. If you look at their censuses, then whoever there is not there: Little Russians, Russians, Tatars, Turks. Armenians, Jews (it seems that there was even one chieftain), there were even Poles. So this is still that "hodgepodge". But they all considered themselves to be Russian, they were Orthodox. Uniates were killed immediately, for betraying the faith. A slut or a Turk could spare, the Uniate immediately on the count. And now the most ardent "Cossacks" in Ukraine from the western regions - slaves and traitors to the faith are trying to ascribe to themselves the history of free Orthodox soldiers.


        Where without brave Armenians! And here they are already, in the Cossacks ... Even the chieftains)))
      3. The comment was deleted.
        1. Pancir026
          Pancir026 1 June 2017 17: 26
          +2
          Quote: ws.kotov
          mud and lo

          Are you talking about yourself?
          we know the canonical form of Repin's painting.
          http://kartina-ru.livejournal.com/14503.html
        2. svp67
          svp67 1 June 2017 17: 35
          +6
          Quote: ws.kotov
          We look at the picture of Repin (a piece) "Cossacks" and bang our head against the wall

          Let’s be without insults. As you in one of the comments you called this ensign - STATE. And what state did he belong to at that time? But here I see a banner - a “banner”, one of the regiments of the Zaporizhzhya Sich, but there were many of them there.

          But these are not STATE flags. By the way, on a yellow - black patch, a black Austrian two-headed eagle, which clearly says that the banner is Galician.
          1. ws.kotov
            ws.kotov 1 June 2017 17: 49
            0
            Quote: svp67
            Let's get offended

            it was an answer
            1. The comment was deleted.
          2. ws.kotov
            ws.kotov 2 June 2017 00: 31
            +1
            svp67
            You gave examples (in the picture) I don’t know which banners, to be honest.
            What is interesting is a historical fact:
            before buying a painting [for 35 thousand rubles], Emperor Alexander the Third asked for an expert opinion on it: is everything correctly depicted by the artist - in the spirit of the times? And here is what received the answer from the philologist and historian Fedor Korsh: (Korsh Fedor Evgenievich, information is on Wikipedia)
            "... the Cossack banners depicted by the artist Repin in his painting do not contain any foreign trends in their color set, but reflect the eternal continuity of the colors of gold and heaven, constantly inherent in all the insignia in South Russia since the time of the Grand Dukes of Kiev up to the dissolution of the Zaporizhzhya freemen. There is plenty of written evidence in domestic and foreign purely historical sources, as well as in a number of objects of material art of those ancient times. "

            "do not contain any foreign trends" - What a twist! hi
    3. Serge
      Serge 1 June 2017 10: 50
      +4
      And what are the Cossacks ancestors of Ukrainians? The Cossacks themselves always considered themselves a separate nationality, then a separate estate, although they do not fall under either one or the other. Cossacks during the Zaporizhia Sich in relation to the rest of the people who inhabited then the territory of modern, there is not even not modern, but the territory of that Ukraine, there was a minority, and they called the rest of the people Ukrainians. And if you call the Cossack Little Russian or even Russian, you could immediately get a snout. After unification with Russia, the Cossacks began to faithfully serve the Russian Tsar, but even in this case they did not consider the Mebel Little Russians. So chio attempts to write down the Cossacks to their ancestors can only take place if your family tree confirms your personal family ties, your personal ones, and not in those Ukrainians who recorded themselves as ancestors of the Cossacks, pharaohs or anyone else It was.
    4. Looking for
      Looking for 1 June 2017 14: 54
      +1
      Donchaks and Kubans served their homeland. And the Cossacks changed owners like Pole gloves, Russians, Turks. They even served the French. They put their profit above all else. And your expression, “crest like a Cossack on the Don,” generally speaks of an absolute misunderstanding of this word.
      1. Alikos
        Alikos 1 June 2017 16: 16
        0
        Quote: Seeker
        Donchaks and Kubans served their homeland. And the Cossacks changed owners like Pole gloves, Russians, Turks. They even served the French. They put their profit above all else. And your expression, “crest like a Cossack on the Don,” generally speaks of an absolute misunderstanding of this word.

        About 20-30 years ago,
        I can be mistaken, there was an article, in my opinion, in Turkey, faithfully for several generations, Terek or Don served in the protection of the highest ranks.
        1. Weyland
          Weyland 3 June 2017 12: 59
          0
          Quote: Alikos
          in Turkey, faithfully for several generations, Terek or Don served as the guard of the highest ranks.

          Don, "Nekrasovites" who managed to wash off from Peter after the suppression of the Bulavin uprising. But when they entered the Turkish service, they immediately clearly and forever stipulated the condition: "we are not fighting against Russia!" (unlike the Zaporozhye Zadunays - with whom the Nekrasovites, by the way, were in fierce hostility!)
      2. Nagaibak
        Nagaibak 1 June 2017 21: 13
        0
        Seeker "Donchaks and Kubans served their homeland. And the Cossacks changed owners like Poles, Russians, Turks. They even served the French. They put their own profit above all else."
        As far as I know, the Kuban formed from the merger of the Black Sea Cossack army (Cossacks) and Linear (mostly Don) seem in 1867. There were no more Cossack troops in Ukraine. There were people of Cossack origin, but ... in a non-Cossack army they quickly assimilated and became Little Russians or Great Russians who lived where.
      3. Weyland
        Weyland 2 June 2017 22: 30
        0
        Quote: Seeker
        Donchaks and Kuban served their homeland

        Nekrasovtsy (Donets) actually served the Turks wink
        But: the Transdanders actively participated in the wars of Turkey against Russia, and the Nekrasovites strictly observed the Ignatian covenant hi : "against Russia - do not fight!"
    5. Standard
      Standard 1 June 2017 19: 46
      +1
      Quote: victorsh
      I am sure that the son, that the daughter in the column of nationality, will be said by Ukrainians (unfortunately there are no Ukrainians), citizens of Russia.


      You can, of course, be corrupted as an old man. But only Ukrainians at this stage are the non-indigenous people of the Russian Federation. And given the behavior of your historical homeland (although in vain you think the Cossacks and Ukrainians are one and the same), it is better for them to go to Ukraine before the census. There is no one to mess with the well-being of your children. Except you.
      And this is no joke.
      1. victorsh
        victorsh 2 June 2017 19: 12
        0
        It’s not for you to tell me WHERE my children live. 30 YEARS in the army of the Russian Federation, serve from a soldier to a senior officer, let's talk.
    6. Dart2027
      Dart2027 1 June 2017 22: 55
      0
      Quote: victorsh
      But. "Crest" is like a Cossack on the Don.

      Cossacks are not a people, but an estate. But Ukrainians were invented precisely as a separate people.
  6. Firstnormann
    Firstnormann 1 June 2017 07: 27
    +8
    uh sadness sorrow Ukrainian misfortune still and Yaroslav the wise to his homeland ruffled raspberries ruined the Russian truth invented sold out to the invaders Moskals zrada zrada
    1. Standard
      Standard 1 June 2017 19: 48
      +1
      Quote: FirstNormann
      invented the Russian truth

      I would not be surprised if dill and about the Russian truth come up with a thread.
  7. parusnik
    parusnik 1 June 2017 07: 50
    +8
    Only the Bolsheviks created two new statehoods - Ukrainian and Belarusian.
    ..Yes so ..but the Austrians and Poles began to melt peoples' brains..to create an ABC and to suggest that Ukrainians and Belarusians are a separate nation, almost Europe and have to admit they have succeeded ... Succeeds now ... But dig a little deeper, we are all Russian .. Do not understand this, they will break us all and the Great Russians and Little Russians and Belorussians .. Drang nach Osten has not been canceled since the XNUMXth century and it is happening now .. It sounds differently: you need to join the family of European nations .. only in this family you will find your happiness ...
    1. sychiov
      sychiov 1 June 2017 10: 21
      +4
      .Yes so ..but the Austrians and Poles began to melt peoples' brains .. create an ABC and suggest that Ukrainians and Belarusians are a separate nation, almost Europe and admittedly have succeeded in this ... Succeeds now ..


      Dip deeper Ватикан, because almost the whole west was Catholic, from the Commonwealth, to Hungary and Austria.
      1. venaya
        venaya 1 June 2017 14: 21
        +3
        Quote: sychiov
        almost the whole west was Catholic, from the Commonwealth, to Hungary and Austria

        All this is a centuries-old process of occupation, military, religious, ideological, sometimes even ethnic. It began a long time ago, more than a millennium ago, now they are already calling numbers from 4 to 5 thousand years, on this occasion there was already an article on VO.
  8. Olgovich
    Olgovich 1 June 2017 07: 58
    +4
    Only Bolsheviks created two new statehoods - Ukrainian and Belarusian. At the same time, two new “people” - “Ukrainians” and “Belarusians” were artificially separated from the Russian superethnos, they created the Ukrainian SSR and the BSSR. Although at the turn of the nineteenth and twentieth centuries ordinary people, as in the days of Ancient Russia, Svyatoslav Igorevich and Alexander Yaroslavich, used one ethnonym for their national self-determination - русские

    I agree with the author in many ways.

    Only he did not give evaluation of to the Bolsheviks who created it. Who are they, judging by these acts?
    The answer is unequivocal, but it did not sound, but in vain.
    1. smr
      smr 1 June 2017 08: 46
      +3
      And the Bolsheviks also came up with a language for Ukrainians?
      1. NKT
        NKT 1 June 2017 09: 03
        10
        They did not come up with, but systematized one of the dialects of the Russian language and began to develop it as a language. This is the decision of the CPSU (b). This adverb is still developing, and the Ukrainians themselves are now using different dialects or their mixture)
        1. smr
          smr 1 June 2017 11: 01
          +2
          How did Shevchenko manage to write in an adverb, which the Bolsheviks had not yet invented?
          "Love your Ukraine.
          Love її ... during the lut ..., "
          1. NKT
            NKT 1 June 2017 11: 34
            +1
            And where is my phrase about an invented dialect? Read carefully!
            1. smr
              smr 1 June 2017 11: 49
              +2
              So the Bolsheviks and the Russian dialect systematized (even several letters were abandoned).
              1. NKT
                NKT 1 June 2017 13: 30
                +4
                You are an adverb that is derived from language, and do not compare the language itself. The dialect was used at the household level in a very limited circle, and after the creation of the state in 1991 they again try to artificially introduce it to the masses. If people do not want to speak it, read books, why plant it?

                To create an independent state, language does not matter, it is important to have the people themselves, as an ethnic group, on these lands, but Ukraine has problems with this. As Kravchuk said in 91 g, we now have the state of Ukraine, we need to create Ukrainians.
          2. Nikolay K
            Nikolay K 2 June 2017 00: 08
            0
            Over time, two languages ​​developed in Russia: the common people (more precisely, the common languages ​​of different regions in the form of local dialects, including the so-called surzhik, this is actually the Ukrainian dialect) and the language of the Moscow nobility, which became official Russian, including literary language.
            Moreover, common languages ​​were historically much closer to Old Slavonic, in contrast to the current Russian language, in which there were many borrowings first from the Turkic languages ​​(during the Mongol-Tatar yoke), then from German, French and English. Accordingly, the current surzhik is much closer to the original Slavic languages, incl. Sanskrit In contrast, the current Ukrainian language is an artificial language, a mixture of surzhik, Polish, Galician dialects and fantasies of current Ukrainian authors.
            A similar situation was in Greece. There, too, after the Turkish occupation, two languages ​​formed. But unlike Russia, after the meeting, the official language was recognized as the common people.
          3. kitamo
            kitamo 2 June 2017 08: 31
            0
            Quote: smr
            How did Shevchenko manage to write in an adverb, which the Bolsheviks had not yet invented?
            "Love your Ukraine.
            Love її ... during the lut ..., "


            but this is "during the" I am fierce ", this is from what language?
            in Russian "during a dashing"
            in Ukrainian "in the middle of the day" ...
            but "during" I, "was that what they said in his village?
      2. Olgovich
        Olgovich 1 June 2017 09: 26
        11
        Quote: smr
        And the Bolsheviks also came up with a language for Ukrainians?


        On "Grammar of Metelius Smotrytsky" learned Russian in the 18th century both in Moscow and Kiev..
        Malorussky-Russian adverb
        1. Catherine II
          Catherine II 1 June 2017 10: 55
          +2
          Quote: Olgovich
          Malorussky-Russian adverb

          and the version that languages ​​themselves developed, being separated by borders and climatic conditions with lines of contact with other languages ​​and cultures?
          The ancestral home is one, but the development is different. This is very close.
          We can say that Russian is an adverb of Ukrainian. And it will be the same.
          There is no consensus, there is only the expediency of recognizing one or another. And life is above that. Latin has given rise to many languages, but is not used by itself (except for science).
          1. venaya
            venaya 1 June 2017 13: 29
            +3
            Quote: Catherine II
            We can say that Russian is an adverb of Ukrainian. And it will be the same ... And life is above that. Latin has launched many languages, but is not used

            I don’t understand you. The Latin language arose on the basis of one of the dialects of the Old Russian language of Slovenes, races (Etruscans). The Ukrainian language is not just a dialect of Russian, but was created by order of the GRU of the Austro-Hungarian Army as a citizen of Austria-Hungary, prof. Grushevsky. For the creation of the "Ukrainian" language the money paid and not small. This is a frankly custom language, and not some kind of dialect, although it was really created on the basis of Russian, Polish and Surzhik (all Russian dialects). I note: in the US, English is used, not American, because no one paid to create a new language, their dialect itself arose. The German language was also created artificially, under the leadership of the reformer Martin Luther, also custom-made, for money, because almost everyone there spoke their own dialect of the Russian language, like almost all of modern Europe once. The term "Ukraine" itself is of foreign origin, that is, in every occupational and Ukrainian language is also occupational since it is of foreign origin.
            1. alatanas
              alatanas 1 June 2017 14: 53
              0
              I don’t understand you. The Latin language arose on the basis of one of the dialects of the Old Russian language of Slovenes, races (Etruscans)

              Like BoRussianOia - Dortmund - "primordially Russian supratnos" command. lol
              1. venaya
                venaya 1 June 2017 15: 38
                +3
                Quote: alatanas
                As well as Borussia ..

                So after all, the current "Germany" (Germany, BRD), at first as the "German Empire" was founded only in 1871, under the leadership of the Prussian kingdom. But the Prussian kingdom and neighboring kingdoms are located on the territory previously called Varangian Rus
                (by the way, the Rurikovich are from there), and Porusia (hence the term Prussia), and Venus and God knows how, but for many millennia she has been Russian-speaking. Even today, their archaeologists often say: "Everything here is up to Slavic magma." By the way, it’s amazing, why was she suddenly called “Germanic”? Almost all empires are usually called based on the original name of the metropolis, and then suddenly they called it a word from the British dialect of Yiddish. Does this surprise you? Anyway, what does he mean? After all, they now call themselves Deutsch, in their local dialect. And their capital, Berlin, is a term of purely Russian origin (ex. "Den"). And if we take the etymology of the origin of the names of other places, rivers, lakes, towns and cities, it has long been found that 95% of them are also of Russian origin. Maybe you simply don’t know or are not interested? Before you correct others, try to study this issue deeper and more closely.
          2. Olgovich
            Olgovich 1 June 2017 13: 35
            +3
            Quote: Catherine II
            We can say that Russian is an adverb of Ukrainian. And it will be the same.

            It is impossible. Russia was, but Ukraine was not. T.N. Ukrainian "alphabet" exists already ... from the end of the 19th century.
            In general, a dispute is pointless. For a hundred years, Little Russians were KILLED in the literal sense of the word that they were Ukrainians, and that was both grandmothers and parents. They must not be trusted

            It is practically impossible to recognize substitution.

            But I recommend reading Sergei Rodin’s wonderful book "Refusing the Russian name.

            There are answers to everything.
            1. venaya
              venaya 1 June 2017 14: 31
              +1
              Quote: Olgovich
              Ukrainian "alphabet" exists already ... from the end of the 19th century.

              This is not accuracy: Kulish created a simplified schedule of writing, a “kulishovka” for the illiterate population of Transcarpathian Rus, Rusyns, in order to increase literacy. The new "Ukrainian" alphabet appears only in 1918, together with the reform of the spelling of the Great Russian language almost simultaneously with the goal of dividing one people at least at the dialectic-linguistic level. This was the task set by the organizers of this entire coup.
            2. smr
              smr 1 June 2017 14: 59
              0
              And I recommend reading Shevchenko’s poems about “Ukraine”. But he didn’t live at the end of the 19th century
              1. venaya
                venaya 1 June 2017 15: 47
                +2
                Quote: smr
                I recommend reading Shevchenko’s poems about “Ukraine”

                Try to look for similar poems about Siberia, the Far East, the Extreme North - after all, this is also all the outskirts of Ukraine. I think that here you will have the greatest opportunities. And the state "Ukraine" (the Polish term means their colony) was formed only in the 1991th year. it is not clear on what legal basis.
            3. Catherine II
              Catherine II 1 June 2017 17: 54
              +1
              Quote: Olgovich
              Russia was, but Ukraine was not. T.N. Ukrainian "alphabet" exists already ... from the end of the 19 century.
              In general, a dispute is pointless. For a hundred years, Little Russians were KILLED in the literal sense of the word that they were Ukrainians, and that was both grandmothers and parents. They can not be trusted

              oh trouble trouble ..
              Do Ukrainians refuse Russia? On the contrary. They strongly emphasize its significance for modern Ukraine.
              The Little Russians the population of present-day Ukraine has become exceptionally short-lived. Being before this Russian, Rusyns, Christians, constipation, "Ruska" and so on ... The term vanished with tsarist power. For several generations, Ukrainians were born and died, they defended and built the USSR by Ukrainians and 26 years in independent Ukraine ... almost half of the life of the term is Little Russians.
              A dispute is meaningless only because everyone wants to share a common history. And she’s a draw, neither the Russian Federation nor Ukraine. She is her own. And both countries write for themselves. And yes - Ukraine does not refuse Russia.
          3. Standard
            Standard 1 June 2017 20: 39
            0
            Quote: Catherine II
            We can say that Russian is an adverb of Ukrainian. And it will be the same.

            You can't say that. Moreover, get "the same." The peoples are different. And their story is different.
        2. smr
          smr 1 June 2017 11: 07
          +1
          “Grammar” of Smotrytsky is an outstanding monument of Slavic grammatical thought. The work of Smotrytsky reflects the specific phenomena of the Church Slavonic language.
          ============
          But not Russian
          1. Olgovich
            Olgovich 1 June 2017 13: 36
            +1
            Quote: smr
            “Grammar” of Smotrytsky is an outstanding monument of Slavic grammatical thought. The work of Smotrytsky reflects the specific phenomena of the Church Slavonic language.
            ============
            But not Russian


            Yes, yes ..... And you READ her-will be surprised.
          2. venaya
            venaya 1 June 2017 13: 58
            +1
            Quote: smr
            "Grammar" of Smotrytsky - ... the phenomenon of the Church Slavonic language.
            But not Russian

            Forgive me, but you do not know: the term "Slavs" appears only in the XNUMXth century, before the terms Russ, Russian, etc. were used. "Church Slavonic language" is an artificially created language into which the "new" religion, Christianity, was translated. The ancient religion of the people based on the Vedas (knowledge) was recorded in Old Russian languages. This Vedic religion was widespread throughout the globe, which is found everywhere found inscriptions with the names of Russian gods. Study the topic, if of course it is interesting to you.
            1. smr
              smr 1 June 2017 14: 54
              0
              Aha. Church Slavonic appeared in the time of Cyril and Mythodius, and the term Slavs only in the 16th century?
              But what about the Slovenes, Slovaks. And the Poles with the Bulgarians, Serbs in the know that the term appeared only in the 16th century?
              1. venaya
                venaya 1 June 2017 16: 20
                +1
                Quote: smr
                Church Slavonic appeared in the time of Cyril and Mythodius

                Moreover, I will say that according to publications, Cyril and Mythodius themselves appear only after 1901, check the published sources of that time. Please do not confuse the terms "Slovenia"- slovaty, that is, speaking in Russian, and the term"Slavs"- a clear newspeak of religious origin (from the ancient Vedic term" Orthodoxy ") - and it is known by documents only from the XNUMXth century, not earlier. The rest is all from the evil one, the usual zombie today. And the Church Slavonic itself could not appear before the translation of the Bible itself onto it, which happened recently, around the XNUMXth century, take an interest in it yourself.
      3. Standard
        Standard 1 June 2017 19: 53
        0
        Quote: smr
        language for Ukrainians, too, the Bolsheviks came up with?

        More like no one.
        And there was still some major from the Austrian General Staff who claimed that the Ukrainians were his brainchild. There is a lot of this information on the net.
        1. Catherine II
          Catherine II 2 June 2017 17: 43
          0
          Quote: Norma
          And there was still some major from the Austrian General Staff who claimed that the Ukrainians were his brainchild. There is a lot of this information on the net.

          I saw that demotivator. Where did the whole General Staff of AB come up with Ukrainians, who is the language, who is the culture, who is the written language, who are the bloomers and so on ...
          You can’t think of something without a foundation, this is the first. And the fact that literary works in this language were up to the General Staff is already a puncture. AV had other problems ..
      4. Weyland
        Weyland 2 June 2017 22: 35
        0
        Quote: smr
        And the Bolsheviks also came up with a language for Ukrainians?

        It was invented by Michal Sergeich G ... did not guess, Grushevsky! am
        ICHS, this explicit Austrian agent was treated by the Bolsheviks, and even under Stalin they were not shot - he died his death ...
  9. Altona
    Altona 1 June 2017 09: 26
    +3
    Quote: victorsh
    I was still a child, that grandfather Ivan (mother's father), that grandfather Timothy (daddy) told about my ancestors-Cossacks.

    --------------------------
    And sho? In my family there was a real grandfather of mine who would give four handicap to all Cossacks. He was at war, he served from 1940 to 1946, in all the places where he lived, had lovers, even in the army, he finished serving as foreman. He worked on a collective farm, at first a blacksmith, then just a stabler, 10 horses were at the stable, he went round himself, followed them. He was a good shooter and hunter. And I don’t need any mythical distant and not always adequate ancestors, all the more so such ancestors as Cossacks. Which is sometimes to the Russian Tsar, then to the Polish Kruel, then to the Turkish Sultan, or even to Charles XII in general.
  10. captain
    captain 1 June 2017 09: 37
    +3
    Thanks to A. Samsonov for the article. Put a plus.
  11. sds87
    sds87 1 June 2017 09: 45
    +6
    Yes - the Bolsheviks did things by coming to power. The good thing is that they managed to prevent the country from being completely occupied by foreign interventionists under the command of Kolchak. Why was it necessary to invent new ethnic groups and nationalities? Lenin was smart, but many of his actions raise big questions with me. Was it not initially clear that any isolation would sooner or later lead to separation? And when the leaders of the USSR sold for candy wrappers and, in spite of the people, signed the assassination of the USSR, this division occurred. And at the same time, one should not forget that nationalist sentiments in Ukraine never calmed down. I read that already under Khrushchev, work began on processing leaders and people in order to set them against the Soviet Union. Moreover, this was done even by foreigners, and by the Kremlin. That is, the infection has infiltrated the leadership of the country under Stalin. It is a pity that although Stalin is called a tyrant and the sole person responsible for everything in the USSR, he has never had real unlimited power that would give him the opportunity to clean out all the rot from the Party. And already in the peace years, this rotten party elite, led by Khrushchev, killed Stalin and his closest associates, and he was denigrated at the Twentieth Congress of the CPSU by the lips of this bald whistle-blower "personality cult of Stalin." And after the death of Stalin in 1953, the USSR lasted only 4 decades. This means that the party has rotted completely. Not for nothing that in modern Russia all tasty places are occupied by people holding a party ticket in their home archives.
  12. Berezin Alexander
    Berezin Alexander 1 June 2017 09: 52
    +6
    After all that has happened, no one and nothing will force me to recognize the Ukrainians as part of the Russian people. I will do everything so that my children do not tie themselves in family ties with a nation of traitors and beggars. Let these mankurts fall in the EU, build a European rampart on the border with Russia and no longer appear on our land.
    1. Kenxnumx
      Kenxnumx 1 June 2017 22: 38
      +1
      Studying the history of Ukraine eliminates all illusions about the fraternal people.
  13. Kenxnumx
    Kenxnumx 1 June 2017 09: 56
    +4
    That's right, of course, they are Russian. That we are not Russian. Mordovians, Hordes, and puffers. And we stole the name from them.
    1. IvanTheTerrible
      IvanTheTerrible 1 June 2017 11: 32
      +4
      At the same time, Ukrainian racists seriously consider ugrophins to be racially inferior subhuman. Apparently, they don’t know what kind of society and state these “untimers” have built for themselves in Finland. smile
    2. Victor N
      Victor N 1 June 2017 18: 13
      +2
      you are not Russian, we will not confuse
    3. Standard
      Standard 1 June 2017 20: 42
      0
      Quote: Ken71
      We are not Russians, and the name we stole from them.

      And in whose language did you slap this kament - in your own or in Ukrainian?
      1. Kenxnumx
        Kenxnumx 1 June 2017 22: 22
        +1
        And you at all do not understand the movement of mov?
  14. sychiov
    sychiov 1 June 2017 10: 14
    +8
    Since that time, in Ukraine (Little Russia), the Bandera Nazis have been completely freed, who turned out to be convenient tools in the hands of thieves' oligarchic family groups focused on sales, robbery - “privatization” of the national heritage, created by the works of many generations of Russian and Soviet people.


    1. All the oligarchic clans of Ukraine have purely Jewish roots, isn’t it really necessary to argue with this?

    Hence the origins of the current tragedy of Little Russia (Ukraine), where the situation reached the war between Russians and Russians to the delight of the enemies of Russian civilization and people. Where Kiev is an ancient Russian capital, it is occupied by a gangster pro-Western regime, performing installations of the West.


    2. Once upon a time more than 1300 years ago, Kiev was already occupied by the Jews of the Khazar Khaganate.

    The purpose of such a dismemberment is obvious - the ethnocultural, linguistic genocide of the Russian superethnos, the solution of the "Russian question" by the masters of the West, when some Russians (who are told that they are different people) are pitted against others.


    3. The Rothschilbs, Rockefellers, of course, not Jews ?, and 90% of the banks of the US Federal Reserve,
    Of course they do not belong to the Jewish clans?

    4. Hence the conclusion, who pitted people on the Donbass? Kolomoisky with Korban, etc. ... probably also not Jews?
    And what’s most interesting, BUT the volunteer battalions in 2014 trained the instructor of the Central Command of Israel, from Israel.

    Is it time to open your eyes in order to see the truth, otherwise the viewers when they convict criminal Zionism immediately recall Hitler, it’s not possible to stick to anyone but our country.

    Now I understand I. Stalin, and the case of Jewish doctors, while the Zionist state of Israel was just being created.
    1. Kenxnumx
      Kenxnumx 1 June 2017 22: 40
      +1
      What is your anti-Semitic text.
  15. Catherine II
    Catherine II 1 June 2017 10: 42
    +2
    The inscription on the base read: “Anna the Russian, Queen of France” (French “Anne de Russie Reine de France”)

    how cleverly Samsonov used the discrepancies
    In the monastery founded by Anna in 1065 named after St. Vincent (abbey of Saint Vincent [fr]) in Senlis near Paris in front of the chapel in XVII century, her sculpture was installed with a small model of the temple she founded in her hand. The inscription on the cap read: “Anna the Russian, Queen of France” (French “Anne de Russie Reine de France”). On 29 of September, 1996 of the year, the inscription under the statue was changed to "Anna of Kiev, Queen of France" (FR. "Anne de Kiev Reine de France"). The name change took place in the presence of the Ambassador of Ukraine to France and a number of local government officials
    Here is what Samsonov writes
    In the monastery of St. Vincent founded by Anna in 1065 (Saint Vincent Abbey) in Senlis near Paris in front of the chapel in the 17th century, her sculpture was installed with a small model of the temple she founded in her hand

    The sculpture is then 17 century, and the monastery 11 century. But Samsonov’s both dates back to the 11 century! That is, a “remake” with different variations. But not the original 11 of the century
    Her autograph was preserved in Cyrillic under one of the acts: ANA RINA (but this is not the name distorted by the authors of Ukraine Ruin) but an old man. queen.
    Anna was married twice. In old Russian sources about her almost nothing. You need to believe European. And then their 2 stage.
    Now let’s listen to what the Ukrainians say, for Samsonov starts the war for history again, where Ukraine and Russia have a real battle smile
    Volodymyr Rychka (Doctor of Historical Sciences, Institute of History of Ukraine)
    Air Force Ukraine: What was Anna Yaroslavna’s Identity?

    Vladimir Rychka: In the days when Anna Yaroslavna lived, the whole of Europe was like a single house and the ties between the dynasties were extremely saturated.
    Neither she herself, nor her father, Yaroslav, ever considered themselves either Russians, Ukrainians, Belarusians, or Swedes.
    The concept of ethnicity in those days was absent.
    They considered themselves "Russian" - that is, Christians. (Here is a blow to VO commentators)
    Therefore, thanks to the former ambassador of Ukraine to France, Yuriy Kochubey, the inscription on the monument to Anna in Senlis looks like this: “Anna Kievskaya” - that is what she considered herself to be.
    That officials do not understand that the concept of a nation in the XI-XII centuries. did not exist. That Anna Yaroslavna considered herself Russian, Christian, and a Kiev woman — these were her markers of identity.

    Air Force Ukraine: Why are there almost no references to it in Russian chronicles?
    VR: The ancient Russian chroniclers did not pay due attention to the female part of the princely family. They left only stingy certificates of their birth and sometimes of marriage.
    Even the deeds of Princess Olga were extremely difficult for chroniclers to describe. The chronicler complained: "How am I a sinner to do this if she was a woman?" But then he solved this problem, and wrote: "masculine wisdom had ..."
    Ukrainian Air Force: How important was Anna Yaroslavna in the history of France?
    VR: Not too important. Her personal life with Henry did not work out; he passed away early.
    Then she had a love affair, and this even caused discontent of the Pope.
    If she had made a truly outstanding contribution to history, then we would have seen her tombstone in Saint-Denis, where Henry himself and other French kings were buried.
    Therefore, one should not exaggerate the role of her figure.
    In general, the fate of these children, who were forced to go to foreign lands at a young age, is rather sympathetic.
    At the same time, in the French culture, its role is more significant. This is evidenced by the numerous appeals of modern French writers to her figure.
    The last such attempt was the work of the journalist and writer Philip Delorm "Anna Kievskaya". This book was also translated into Ukrainian.
    Writers are free to romanticize figures in their work, and historians should follow the sources and calmly approach the topic.
    Therefore, the statement of the Russian president indicates a lack of awareness. Serious Russian historians would never say that.
    Air Force Ukraine: Are there any indications of a special relationship between then-France and Russia during the time of Anna Yaroslavna?
    VR: Nothing has been preserved.
    But there is a bold hypothesis that Anna, on that far journey, was accompanied by the first Russian by birth Metropolitan Hilarion. He allegedly observed local customs and borrowed something from church rites for Russia.
    Air Force Ukraine: How do you rate the statement by the Russian president about Anna Yaroslavna?
    Vitaliy Shcherbak: It goes along the lines of all-Russian history written in the 18th-19th centuries. and claiming that Russia originates from the time of ancient Russia.
    The expression itself has no historical, scientific background - it was made only on a political plane.
    Neither Russia nor Muscovy at the time of Yaroslavna was ...
    Air Force Ukraine: What was its role in Russian history?
    V.SCH .: She was the daughter of Yaroslav the Wise, and that’s all.
    And looking up from the parental nest, she took certain steps to control France.
    We are talking about the familiar role of manager of a large kingdom. This did not last very long, after which her son was on the throne (Philip I. - Ed.), And she married again.
    Too exalted the role of Anna Yaroslavna as a great statesman of France is impossible. But it can be noted that the representative of our ethnic group, Russian, Ukrainian, played a role in French history.
    The position that she allegedly tried to worry about her homeland is ambiguous. Many sources about her activities have not been preserved ...
    At that time, France was not some kind of extraordinary kingdom, which was ahead of Russia. On the contrary, its level of social development may have been even lower than Kiev.
    Ukrainian Air Force: How did Yaroslav the Wise benefit from his daughter’s marriage with the French monarch?
    V.SCH .: It was an unwritten law in the Middle Ages, which passed in modern times, to maintain the level of international relations to strengthen dynasties.
    This is not to say that this somehow particularly influenced relations between France and Russia - the countries were too far apart.
    But indirectly, I think, the information that the Russian prince has a high conjuncture in Europe reached both Krakow and the capital of the Hungarian kingdom, where another daughter of Yaroslav went.
    And I’ll add from myself - Ukrainians do not refuse the term Rus, and Russians (and here, even against some radicals who do not organically digest the word itself). Refusing at least one of the term means to abandon Kievan Rus, which is the fundamental core of Ukrainian theory.
    The struggle itself focused here on the Kiev legacy (where all Russia enters, from Novgorod and Kiev) between the two centers, Kiev and Moscow. And both have a chance.
    1. Okolotochny
      Okolotochny 1 June 2017 12: 16
      12
      And no one says that Anna Yaroslavna was a RUSSIAN woman. Listen, no matter how with the yellow-blakitny, it starts to look for undercoats.
      At a meeting with French President Macron, Putin said that the friendship of Russia and the French people began with the daughter of Princess Yaroslav the Wise Anna, who had left for her husband in Paris. He called Anna Yaroslavna "Russian princess ".

      Show where Putin called Anna a Russian woman ???? Antagonism towards everything Russian has already been ingrained in you (the inhabitants of an independent). Russia is a successor of Russia, as others have refused it. For cookies they wanted to go to Europe. And now I want and inject. And why did they change the inscription if it was not there? To amuse Khokhlyatsk pride so that Russianness does not sound? And all because: "Ukraine is not Russia." Here is the virus you have accepted. Moreover, voluntarily adopted.
      1. Catherine II
        Catherine II 1 June 2017 18: 25
        +2
        Quote: Okolotochny
        Show where Putin called Anna a Russian ??

        I somewhere expressed the opinion that he called her that? Here is an article about the “appropriation” of “that there are no Ukrainians and never was.” And Princess A.Ya. became another round of the struggle for heritage.
        You carefully watched my post - there the representative of the Ukrainian Institute himself dignifies her Russian! And he gives the answer that her affiliation neither to Ukraine nor to the Russian Federation has anything to do, but both will share it smile
        Quote: Okolotochny
        antagonism to all Russian

        so what, there was just an answer where the word Russian is everywhere .. and I have an antagonism to it ... but not a stick tree.
        I repeat once again. Ukrainians cannot, even if they want to abandon Russia and the words Russian ... because this is the fundamental core of Ukrainian theory!
        We abandon Russian, Kiev, Slavic - everything - our history is as young as the young 25 summer Russia among some politicians from the Russian Federation.
        But still looking for some kind of hidden our hostility to this word? The trouble is ..
        I generally Ukrainian-Russian attempts to pull a blanket over himself, ridiculous. The blanket is old, darned and reshaped many times ... and everyone there is looking for his family coat of arms ...
        1. Okolotochny
          Okolotochny 1 June 2017 18: 42
          +9
          Therefore, the statement of the Russian president indicates a lack of awareness. Serious Russian historians would never say that.

          Is your phrase or not? What did GDP say wrong? He spoke for all of Russia. Why did I comment so, the GDP "that he is not sufficiently informed" you paid enough attention. But that's why they renamed Anna Kievskaya (that's insanity) - it was somehow smoothed out.
          1. Catherine II
            Catherine II 2 June 2017 10: 48
            +1
            Quote: Okolotochny
            Your phrase or not

            quote from a representative of the institute.
            Quote: Okolotochny
            What did GDP say wrong? He spoke for all of Russia

            Well, with such success, you can close and quotes Poroshenko. He, too, for the whole of Russia.
            Personally, my opinion is that Putin uses history for his polit. ambitions (like other politicians). I still remember how the Russian Federation itself would have won against Hitler without other republics.
            Quote: Okolotochny
            But that's why they renamed Anna Kievskaya

            Well, the original is not (11 century)
            after 5 centuries they wrote, after another 5 centuries they changed. We choose the taste and color.
            Litigation of Kiev and Moscow for Russia will not change
            1. Okolotochny
              Okolotochny 2 June 2017 11: 21
              +7
              That is,
              Personally, my opinion Putin uses history for his polit. ambitions (like other politicians).
              .
              That's right, this is your personal opinion.
              And this is also your personal opinion:
              I still remember how the Russian Federation itself would have won against Hitler without other republics.
              .
              I bring the original:
              "We would have won anyway, since we are a victorious country," Putin said. The prime minister noted that according to official statistics, more than 70% of human losses were suffered by the RSFSR. “The war was won at the expense of the resources of the RSFSR,” the prime minister emphasized. "But this does not detract from the contribution to the victory of all the other republics of the former USSR," Putin said.
              .
              1. Catherine II
                Catherine II 2 June 2017 17: 54
                +1
                Quote: Okolotochny
                "We would have won anyway, since we are a victorious country," Putin said.

                Of course it’s easy to win in alternative. The USSR won on the verge, but here without the Ukrainian SSR and BSSR and others would have won on the basis of confidence in past victories?
                Quote: Okolotochny
                The prime minister noted that according to official statistics, more than 70% of human losses were suffered by the RSFSR.
                certainly easy, if you consider Russian living exclusively in the RSFSR .. yes and then 66%
                Russians 5 756.0 66.402% (wiki)
                Quote: Okolotochny
                "But this does not detract from the contribution to the victory of all the other republics of the former USSR," Putin said.

                certainly does not detract ... the RSFSR would have won anyway, because the country is the winner .. for 70% of losses are Russians, and they live exclusively in the RSFSR ...
                I correctly understood the prime minister, who simply discounted the losses of the BSSR and the USSR, where every 6 died ...
                however, I argue .. the politician blurted out, all this was dressed in an information war on emotions. First time or something ...
                1. Okolotochny
                  Okolotochny 3 June 2017 01: 20
                  +6
                  Everyone understands how he sees and hears. You hear one thing, I'm different.
    2. Was mammoth
      Was mammoth 1 June 2017 15: 25
      +3
      Quote: Catherine II
      The inscription on the cap read: “Anna the Russian, Queen of France” (French “Anne de Russie Reine de France”). On September 29, 1996, the inscription under the statue was changed to “Anna of Kiev, Queen of France” (French “Anne de Kiev Reine de France”). The name change took place in the presence of the Ambassador of Ukraine to France and a number of local government officials

      I would never have thought that the French, for the sake of momentary political gain, would destroy their own historical monuments.
      1. Catherine II
        Catherine II 1 June 2017 18: 00
        +2
        Quote: There was a mammoth
        I would never have thought that the French, for the sake of momentary political gain, would destroy their own historical monuments.

        difficult to say, after 5 centuries (from 11 to 17) after the death of A.Ya. a sculpture was installed with the inscription of one, then after 5 centuries another change.
        Coincidence?
        1. Was mammoth
          Was mammoth 1 June 2017 18: 23
          +2
          Quote: Catherine II
          Coincidence?

          Let's wait a little longer. Just 5 centuries.
          Seriously, this is an indicator of Russophobia in France and the activity of the current government in Ukraine. Yes, I do not agree with your conclusion. We have a common history. Sharing ancestors is an ungrateful task. But, your try.
          1. Catherine II
            Catherine II 2 June 2017 10: 53
            +1
            Quote: There was a mammoth
            Let's wait a little longer. Total 5 centuries

            why wait then
            In 2005, the President of Ukraine Viktor Yushchenko unveiled the monument “Anna of Kiev, Queen of France” in French (“Anne de Kiev Reine de France”)

            The future has already come ...
            After all, who captures the entire heritage of Kievan Rus in Europe? Maybe no one noticed, but the Ukrainians are slowly, but surely doing it.
      2. Standard
        Standard 1 June 2017 20: 50
        +1
        Quote: There was a mammoth
        the French, for the sake of momentary political gain, will destroy their own historical monuments.

        After the "Mistral" nothing to be surprised. Ukrow @ ki turned out to be more expensive than truth.
    3. venaya
      venaya 1 June 2017 18: 22
      +3
      Quote: Catherine II
      Refusing at least one of the term means giving up Kievan Rus - what is the fundamental core of Ukrainian theory

      You see, the term "Kievan Rus" itself is a product of only the 30th century, which was developed in the XNUMXs of the XNUMXth century due to the underdevelopment of historical science at that time. In reality, no "Kievan Rus" previously existed, this is a fairly recent fiction. Yaroslav the Wise belong to the princely family of the Rurikovich, by origin they are Varangians from Varyazhskaya Rus (later called Prussia, Pomerania, Germany) with their clan coat of arms in the form of a falling falcon. In the dialect of the language of Varyazh Rus, the current term "falcon" sounded like "rurik" - hence the name of the dynasty. I note that under Yaroslav the Wise there were no and could not be such concepts as "Kievan Rus", there was no Moscow yet, but there were the Vladimir-Suzdal principality (more precisely the volost) and the Kiev principality (also most likely the volost), but Varyazhskaya Rus seems to be still existed. So the inventions of “Kievan Rus” and “Ukraine” are products only of the XNUMXth century, not earlier.
      1. Catherine II
        Catherine II 2 June 2017 10: 55
        0
        Quote: venaya
        You see, the term "Kievan Rus" itself is a product of only the 19th century

        Yes, Ukrainians themselves agree with this.
        Do you think they only claim the legacy of Kiev? Yes, for the whole heritage of the land of Russia ... For everything.
  16. mar4047083
    mar4047083 1 June 2017 11: 25
    +5
    It remains only to add that nationalities appeared in the USSR in the 30s. Moreover, many appeared artificially, they were then simply invented along with alphabets, probably for the enlargement of ethnic groups. What ancient Ukraine can one talk about if this concept appeared artificially in the beginning of the 20th century. The name frankly is coined mocking -okraina, a resident of the outskirts (underdeveloped, subhuman). It’s like now, some individuals use the expression - zamkadysh (the meaning is the same). The whole essence of what is happening, V. Pelevin beautifully described in "Snuff" back in 2011. Most of this artificial formation is relatively recently (by historical standards), generally called the Wild Field.
    1. unknown
      unknown 1 June 2017 12: 15
      +4
      And the situation with “Belarus” is fundamentally the opposite.
      Historical Lithuania is the true history of Lithuanian Russia.
      The history of the Russian state and the Russians, its inhabitants, Russians.
      No Zhmudiya, with their zhmudy to historical Lithuania have no relationship.
      Like the name "Belarus". White Russia is Moscow Russia.
      Privatized someone else's story.
      And historical Kiev was bought from Lithuania.
      There you have it, “Burn the Commonwealth” (People’s Sich) from “Mozh to Mozh”. Russian Lithuania controlled the territories from the Baltic to the Red Sea. This then it became Black, and was Chermny-Red.
      1. Aitvaras
        Aitvaras 1 June 2017 12: 53
        +3
        Lithuania is Lithuania and nothing less. The Grand Duchy of Lithuania had a capital - Vilnius. The Grand Dukes were first pagans-Lithuanians, until the end of the 14th century, then Catholics. Nobles were appointed to the council under the prince — only Catholics. The letter was both ancient Slavic and Latin. Depending on the need of the prince and his chancellery. In Moscow then this Slavic writing of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania was called the Lithuanian letter. This was not uncommon in the Middle Ages. For example, then in Europe in the main. use Latin. In the Golden Horde -Chinese. Residents, it is true in the DOS. were the ancestors of modern Belarusians, Russians and Ukrainians, but the decision was made by the Lithuanian elite in Vilnius.
        1. smr
          smr 1 June 2017 13: 16
          +1
          According to the observation of the modern Lithuanian academician Z. Zinkevičius, the East Christian wave in Lithuania in the XI-XIV centuries “... was extremely intense and left deep traces in the history of the entire Lithuanian people. (...) It reached Lithuania much earlier than the western wave of Christianity. (...) Eastern Christianity strongly influenced the formation of the worldview and culture of the Lithuanian people long before the official baptism of Lithuania. (...) Apparently, the initiators of the introduction of Western Rite Christianity in Lithuania, the Grand Dukes Jagiello and Vitovt, before that were also baptized in the Eastern rite. ” Zinkevicius calls the Catholic baptism of Lithuania at the end of the 1th century “in principle, already repeated” [XNUMX].
          1. smr
            smr 1 June 2017 13: 20
            0
            In Lithuania (the Grand Duchy of Lithuania) there was a separate Lithuanian metropolis subordinate to the Patriarchate of Constantinople. Periodically, the Lithuanian dioceses were subordinate to the Galician metropolitans and the metropolitans of Kiev and all Russia
        2. smr
          smr 1 June 2017 13: 22
          0
          On October 15, 1432, Orthodox magnates obtained from King Jagaila a privilege that equalized Orthodox nobles in rights with Catholics (thus, almost completely ending the discriminatory provisions of the Gorodelsky privilege of 1413).
          1. Aitvaras
            Aitvaras 1 June 2017 14: 50
            0
            Quite rightly, the influence of the Old Russian lands in the Grand Duchy of Lithuania was very large, many Lithuanian princes took Russian princesses as zhones. There were many mixed marriages, but after death, before the baptism of Lithuania, all the Grand Dukes were burnt at the funeral pyres according to the pagan rite, and it was they, Jagailo and Vitovt, who made the decision to baptize Lithuania according to the Catholic faith.
            The daughter of Prince Vitovt was married to Vasily II, but from this her great-grandchildren Ivan III or Ivan the Terrible cannot be called Lithuanians.
            There were only Catholics in the Royal Council, with Orthodox nobles rights were equal but only after the Lublin Union with Poland in 1569, under King Sigismund-August, the Orthodox received the right to participate in the Royal Council.
        3. stealth
          stealth 21 June 2017 20: 00
          0
          not cities of nonsense, there wasn’t any Vilnius. There was Vilnia ... And your coat of arms of Zhmudinsky "Lokis" (the bear) from which you refused, and grabbed the hands of the "Chase".
    2. Catherine II
      Catherine II 2 June 2017 17: 57
      +2
      Quote: mar4047083
      The name frankly is coined mocking -okraina, a resident of the outskirts (underdeveloped, subhuman).

      you are wrong - the people of the borderland are much more free people, though they risk more. Such people are allowed to have weapons and not be enslaved, because their lot is to protect the border from their own kind
  17. AKsvlad047
    AKsvlad047 1 June 2017 12: 31
    +5
    Good and true article! All 100% in the bull's-eye, and who thinks wrong, that is clearly an enemy to both Ukrainians and Russians! Together we are a great and united community, which no one but ourselves needs !!! Ukraine never existed without Russia, and Russia was the strongest in those days when there were 15 republics! In a multinational state, which is Russia, manifestations of an extreme degree of nationalism (such as I will separate myself and will live in chocolate, enough Muscovites to feed) must be punished instantly and severely! And the fact that Russia can live in the unity of many ethnic groups and religions has been proven for centuries !!! We have not destroyed a single nation, saved all, and in the days of the USSR, many were given their diplomas and written language! Originality as a whole was always welcomed! And can anyone teach us in this regard!?!? America??? Or Europeans with their mono-states ??? They were diluted a little by Muslims, and they baked !!! Great democracy, in its true sense for all peoples, has always been and is only in Russia !!!! Who are all thieves in law ???? And leaders with what roots ??? And look at the aligarchs !!! Are there many Russians ???? DO NOT roll a barrel to Russia !!! We live right !!!! (Except for our capitalists and the power of those who hold leaders, but this is another question).
    And in the war throughout the territory of the former USSR and Russia, only Western and Russian capitalism or imperialism, that is, money, are to blame! And none of you will dispute this !!! Our people have nothing to do with it !!!
  18. bratchanin3
    bratchanin3 1 June 2017 12: 42
    +1
    And I doubt that the Ukrainian is Russian. The Ukrainian is an unfinished Bandera.
    1. Catherine II
      Catherine II 2 June 2017 10: 57
      +1
      Quote: bratchanin3
      Ukrainian is an unfinished Bandera

      hmm .. every 6 who died in the Second World War turns out to be like that .. didn’t know
      They even awarded them Heroes of the USSR and other orders ... and there were many of them in the Army.
  19. Slon_on
    Slon_on 1 June 2017 13: 26
    +5
    All carriers of the haplogroup R1a1 are biological or blood descendants and among themselves, that is, blood relatives that make up a single nation - Russian.
    1. voyaka uh
      voyaka uh 1 June 2017 14: 16
      +2
      You are more careful with haplogroups. Dangerous weapon. Better not to mention ...
      For example, the haplogroup R1a1 is most pronounced among Poles. They are the basis of this haplogroup.
      As if Russian Catholicism does not rattle belay .
      And then ... even the Taliban-Pashtuns - seasoned Islamists in the same R1a1, and even the Jewish tribe of Levi went there to fly recourse ... How will everyone unite, carcasses of light negative .
      1. Zalym
        Zalym 1 June 2017 14: 38
        0
        Quote: voyaka uh
        For example, the haplogroup R1a1 is most pronounced among Poles. They are the basis of this haplogroup.
        As if Russian Catholicism does not rattle.


        And the Kyrgyz. laughing
        In principle, the Y chromosome only shows where your great-great-great-grandfather came from. To really judge the kinship of peoples, you need to watch autosomes.
        1. voyaka uh
          voyaka uh 1 June 2017 14: 45
          0
          Exactly! laughing Forgot about them.
          In general: Hindi-Rus-Yude-Kirghiz Bhai-friendship-Shalom drinks
      2. venaya
        venaya 1 June 2017 21: 22
        +1
        Quote: voyaka uh
        the haplogroup R1a1 is most pronounced in Poles. They are the basis of this haplogroup.
        even the Jewish tribe of Levy pleased to fly in there ... How will everyone unite, extinguish the light

        The genus (haplogroup) R1a1 is even more pronounced in the Pomors of today's Pomerania, because Germany is a former empire! Oranges, in our pomors, R1a1 is 90% - an absolute record, because once it really was the center of ancient Russia. And how many religions have they changed there? After all, do not count. It turns out that with each change of religion they automatically changed their nationality. while they also changed their language, Russian was finally banned only in 1914, in connection with the war. It turns out that with each change of religion or language allowed, the "nationality" automatically changes. What kind of term is this, some kind of clearly crooked, heavily practiced. What kind of "nation" I want to call this group of people, I will call this, not depending on the wishes of the group of these people. I think in such conditions the use of such a term is simply outdated, does not meet the current needs of society, is simply imposed from the outside and it is advisable not to use it at all as very confusing, foggy, unnecessary and even very harmful. After all, look in retrospect, since all these Pomors of Pomerania, the Poles of Polonia (Poland), the Lithuanians of the Russian-Lithuanian Principality, and even less the Little Russians (now Ukrainians), Belarusians and Great Russians earlier were simply Rus (in modern - Russian) and nothing else.
    2. Operator
      Operator 1 June 2017 15: 50
      +2
      Quote: Slon_on
      All carriers of the haplogroup R1a1 are biological or blood descendants and among themselves, that is, blood relatives that make up a single people - Russian

      Not all carriers of the haplogroup R1a belong to such a cultural-linguistic community as the Russian people.

      The carriers of R1 are 60% of Poles, Slovaks and Pashtuns, 55% of Kyrgyz and Tajiks, 50% of Russians, Ukrainians and Belarusians, 45% of Lithuanians, Latvians and Tatars, 40% of Serbs, Croats and Estonians, 35% of Czechs, 30% of Czechs, 25% of Czechs, 20% of Czechs, 15% of Czechs, , 8% of Norwegians, Icelanders, Austrians and Hungarians, 5% of Swedes, Turks and Uyghurs, XNUMX% of Germans, Bosnians, Persians and Indians, XNUMX% of Jews, XNUMX% of Arabs of the Arabian Peninsula.

      All of them are blood relatives - direct descendants of the Aryans who left 22 from Altai thousands of years ago. At present, their number can be estimated at 500 million people, including about 150 million. Russians, Ukrainians and Belarusians.
  20. smr
    smr 1 June 2017 13: 30
    +3
    But that's why the main and first Orthodox priest was called the Metropolitan of Kiev (and not Moscow) and All Russia?
    1. malik
      malik 1 June 2017 22: 16
      +1
      Everything is very simple, learn history.
    2. Alexey RA
      Alexey RA 2 June 2017 15: 32
      +2
      Hehehehe ... in the picture a typical example of a substitution of concepts. For Russia / Russia does not mean only Moscow.
      But they are trying not to remember about Novgorod and about the biography of the great Kiev princes in Ukraine. Because in these biographies there are lines like: reigned in Novgorod, then came to Kiev and began to rule in it. smile
  21. Black Colonel
    Black Colonel 1 June 2017 15: 44
    +2
    Another disaster occurred in 1991, when each “brotherly people” was allocated in an independent republic.
    The catastrophe was still under the USSR, when the UN had separate representations of the Ukrainian SSR and BSSR. On the one hand, it’s good that there were more votes to advance the interests of the USSR, and on the other hand, it turned out as it turned out, we are reaping the fruits of the mines laid by the Bolsheviks for the unity of the Russian Empire (USSR).
    1. Catherine II
      Catherine II 1 June 2017 18: 32
      +1
      Quote: Black Colonel
      The catastrophe was still under the USSR, when the UN had separate representations of the Ukrainian SSR and BSSR.

      poor contemporaries - the Bolsheviks swear they planted bombs and mines .. Well, in general, the USSR also created these republics. And the UNION itself is the UNION of the Republics.
      Votes were given because every 4 and every 6 Belarusian and Ukrainian respectively died in that war + Stalin’s will.
      Who said, take as much sovereignty you want.
  22. Curious
    Curious 1 June 2017 17: 02
    +1
    I never rated Samsonov positively, this article - a confirmation of his level - I do not want to violate the rules of the site, so I will say this - his lot is hamsters. Since a serious analyst cannot but understand that such analytic materials are only harmful to one’s own country and its interests.
    A person, due to either lack of understanding, or simply following the principles of the variety of the first ancient profession (it is also sometimes called the second oldest), stupidly pushes the archaic idea in the new world. The idea is not just archaic, it is not complimentary. Nationalism is the direct enemy of imperialism. The absence of this understanding automatically lowers the author below the baseboard as an analyst.
    For anyone who is even a little capable of analyzing the situation, it’s clear that today they are trying to revive either the empire or the USSR, making Kiev, Tbilisi, etc. the enemies. - nonsense.
    The USSR was created on the ruins of the old tsarist semi-feudal power as a union of peoples freed from national oppression. Is this really not enough to understand the essence of the current contradictions.
    So the author, without suspecting it, pours water into the mill of that world backstage, which he likes to insert into all the holes of history with his article.
    1. Catherine II
      Catherine II 1 June 2017 18: 36
      +1
      Quote: Curious
      the author himself, without suspecting it, pours water into the mill of that world backstage, which he likes to insert into all the holes of history with his article.

      I don’t think so. The article is standard for our time.
      Well this is capitalism. Everything is private. Everything is mine.
      The construction of the common here does not smell. But sharing, yes.
      That's what i thought
      After Hops, we united on the basis of faith
      After the revolution, as a union of republics
      Now, logically, how are corporations? But here everything just repels.
    2. avva2012
      avva2012 1 June 2017 18: 40
      +1
      Curious.
      "... making enemies Kiev, Tbilisi, etc.-nonses."
      I think Samsonov will not make them enemies, they are already enemies. Nobody will ever change their oligarchs to strangers. Moreover, the oligarchs themselves are against it. The West is really stronger and therefore the power of those countries will be on the side of the strong. Whatever and whoever writes, that’s all, it’s a mess of paper. Capitalism in Russia is agony. How long it will last is not known to anyone. The strong one usually suffers longer.
  23. 1536
    1536 1 June 2017 19: 24
    0
    A good example of what parenting is is children raised by animals. It is no longer possible to socialize them later. Mowgli is a fairy tale. But the prototype of Mowgli, a little Frenchman, alas, could not live in human society.
  24. mar4047083
    mar4047083 1 June 2017 20: 23
    0
    Quote: Kohl
    I wish the author of the article would tell the Kremlin who the Russians are. Indeed, in Russia there are no Russians according to Kremlin policy. As they say, they would start with themselves. That is why Putin is already laughed everywhere that he betrays something that he himself does not recognize.

    As for the Russians, in the understanding as they have never been, now as well as the Ukrainians or Belarusians. This is also an invention of the recent past. Until a certain point, there were pro-Orthodox (a change of religion is a criminal offense). Thus, your ancestors could be anyone (even blacks, an example of A.S., Pushkin), but if they spoke Russian (writing ability is optional) and were Orthodox, then they automatically became Russian. This is about the same as that observed by the Jews. Perform the necessary rituals, learn the language, accept Judaism and you are one hundred percent Jew. So the Kremlin is right in its statements. I do not like the Kremlin, read Sholokhov about the Melikhovs. Better never claim that you are one hundred percent Russian. As your ancestors appeared, the question is open, but obviously you are not a XNUMX% descendant of glades or Krivichi. Russian is a religion, language, lifestyle, but not nationality. Again, banal examples: Pushkin, Levitan, Grozny, Godunov and the same Romanovs (the latter is generally the holy Russian Orthodox Church).
    1. Dude
      Dude 1 June 2017 23: 25
      0
      Listen to you - there is simply no Russian people!
      The language is, the culture is, the way of life is, but the very people are not! Your affairs are wonderful, Lord :))
      Even some kind of Russian World, which a whole bunch of ghouls had dreaded before a bear illness — from Kiev and Tallinn to Seattle and Toronto, and for which millions stood up for it — is there, but there is no Russian people, even if you crack it!
      All over the world - there are peoples, like peoples - the French - are, there are Finns, Swedes there, but no Russians!
      Even in Russia itself - there are Yakuts, there are Chechens, there are Kalmyks, but no Russians!
      Fuck you wait, my dear !! Broad, something you open your mouth, in your wet dreams, break not afraid?
      Whose will you be?

      Quote: mar4047083
      How did your ancestors appear, the question is open, but obviously you are not XNUMX%


      Something these words reminded me of? Either the comrades-in-arms of one failed Austrian artist brought to suicide, or some cosmopolitan ethnographers who adore black hats and lush vegetation at their temples :))
  25. intuzazist
    intuzazist 1 June 2017 20: 59
    0
    Quote: Finches
    This is understandable to a normal, educated person, and the law has not been written to fools! laughing

    Duck in this situation, so after 30 years in Ukraine normal will not remain at all ...............
  26. fukudi
    fukudi 1 June 2017 22: 15
    +1
    Saying by Anna Princess Russian, or Ukrainian, what kind of delirium of an agitated mind. If we turn to surviving sources, in particular the Byzantine ones, eyewitnesses and contemporaries Leo Deacon, Kedrin, Patriarch Photius, we will see that the Russians were called Scythian brands, so in the time of the emperor Nicephorus and Emperor John Tsimeskhii, asked for a monetary reward to go against misyes i.e. Bulgarians who brought Vezantium with their raids and Sfedofor-Svyatoslav accepted this proposal. It follows that the Russians, Rusich, etc. was the name of self-determination. For example, Egypt is the Greek name for both people and countries i.e. external name, but the Egyptians called their people and the country of Kemet or Kemetyan, which meant black earth or simply fertile. The first mention in the annals of the 11th century is Pskov Ukraine, which meant the border of the Slavs, then there was a foreign language tribe. For example, in the time of Peter 1, the Ukrainian line was defined, this meant the border between Poland, Russia and the Ottoman port, from which we conclude that Ukraine in ancient times meant a border and nothing more.
  27. Kenxnumx
    Kenxnumx 1 June 2017 22: 25
    +1
    Deaky Toby, God, I’m Muscovite.
  28. Belarus is Russia
    Belarus is Russia 1 June 2017 23: 35
    +3
    Hence, the origins of the current tragedy of Little Russia (Ukraine), where the situation reached the Russian-Russian war to the delight of the enemies of Russian civilization and the people. Where Kiev is the ancient Russian capital, is occupied by the pro-Western gangster regime, performing the installation of the West. Leading linguistic, ethnocultural, socio-economic, criminal genocide of the Russian people of Little Russia. The masters of the West and Kholuy, the thieves' regime in Kiev, perform the task of destroying and dismembering the Russian ethnos, of bleeding Russians with Russians, in order to destroy the still existing young passionary part of the population in mutual slaughter, part - to make them flee to Europe as white slaves and elderly lime by socio-economic genocide (“liberal reforms”, “optimization”). At the same time, all the existing signs of the common Soviet and Russian past, history, culture and language are destroyed.
    Thus, we must remember that the “Ukrainians”, ultimately, are the same Russians (southern Rus), and separating them from the Russian superethnos is an artificial phenomenon, initiated by the enemies of the Russian people, striving for the dismemberment and destruction of Russia, the Russian civilization and our great nation. The purpose of such a dismemberment is obvious - the ethnocultural, linguistic genocide of the Russian superethnos, the solution of the “Russian question” by the masters of the West, when some Russians (who are told that they are a different people) are pitted against others.
    The strategic goal of all Russians (in Little, White and Great Russia) is a single development project based on social justice and ethics of conscience, the unity of Russian super-ethnos within the framework of one statehood.

    Well, that's what I’m saying-Ukraine and Belarus-NEEDED TO GET HOME TO THE RUSSIAN ORTHODOX-IN THE COMPOSITION OF RUSSIA ORTHODOX. And DO NOT BE SEPARATE, INDEPENDENT STATES.
    Lukashenko and Poroshenko need to call Putin and say, Volodya, we are joining Russia, accept! Make a referendum Ukrainian and Belarusian — where people, people will vote for joining Russia — and join the Russian Orthodox Church, home to the Russian Orthodox Church.
  29. smr
    smr 2 June 2017 05: 59
    0
    In general, Anna should have been called Anna Kievskaya or Anna Rurik type like Eleanor Plantagenet or Catherine Valois. Her pope was only the prince of Kiev. After all, the wife of the French, and then the English king was called Alienora of Aquitaine, by the title of Duke of Aquitaine. And the prince of Kiev was not a king or king of Russia, so that his children would be called "Russians." After all, no one called Catherine II — Sophia August of Frederick German or German there, but only Angalt Tserbst. But the children of kings were already called Blanca French, Elizabeth of Hungary, Isabella of England, Catherine of Castile or by the name of the ruling dynasty, because their popes were kings of the respective kingdoms, and not the dukes-counts or princes.
    Well, if, of course, Kiev was the capital of Russia. The main "priest" in Russia was called the Metropolitan of Kiev and All Russia. Despite the fact that in 1299 Kiev, due to ruin and desolation, ceased to be the place of constant residence of the metropolitan and his court, all the metropolitans whose residences were both in Vladimir and in Moscow continued to be called Kiev and All Russia. Since 1461, after the start of autocephaly of the Eastern Russian dioceses that are part of the Moscow state, the metropolitans who had a chair in Moscow became known as Moscow and All Russia, and the metropolitans of western Russia who had a chair in Vilna became known as Kiev, Galitsky and All Russia.
  30. Friday
    Friday 2 June 2017 08: 51
    0
    Rus - Scandinavians who came to rule the proto-Ukrainians, Belarusians and other tribes and nationalities. Russian - means affiliation. Nobody calls himself Polish or French. The Russians are unique in this. Here is a Russian - this is already belonging to Russia.
  31. Spnsr
    Spnsr 2 June 2017 09: 53
    0
    It would not hurt to begin to determine that there are Western Slavs? If we take it for approval, the palyaks are Slavs, then it is more likely that they are the Western Slavs!
    A small amendment, there was a Polish-Lithuanian speech, the Poles appeared later.
    Based on the above statement, we can say that the emergence of the speech of the Commonwealth is nothing more than a disconnection from a single state, which led to a lot of conflicts on the Pskov-Kiev line, because of the territory with the population. The conflict of White and Golden Russia!
    And such a conclusion allows us to make the following statement: in the presence of such large formations, small, as such, could not be! And this, the statement that there were some other small objects that would simply be absorbed by large ones.
    On the other hand, one can make an assertion that there was a more or less populated territory, whose population did not even represent, Russians, Ukrainians, Tatars or Palyaks, at that time there was also one religion, and already an attempt to subjugate led to differences!
  32. mar4047083
    mar4047083 2 June 2017 09: 59
    0
    Quote: Dude
    Listen to you - there is simply no Russian people!
    The language is, the culture is, the way of life is, but the very people are not! Your affairs are wonderful, Lord :))
    Even some kind of Russian World, which a whole bunch of ghouls had dreaded before a bear illness — from Kiev and Tallinn to Seattle and Toronto, and for which millions stood up for it — is there, but there is no Russian people, even if you crack it!
    All over the world - there are peoples, like peoples - the French - are, there are Finns, Swedes there, but no Russians!
    Even in Russia itself - there are Yakuts, there are Chechens, there are Kalmyks, but no Russians!
    Fuck you wait, my dear !! Broad, something you open your mouth, in your wet dreams, break not afraid?
    Whose will you be?
    Quote: mar4047083
    How did your ancestors appear, the question is open, but obviously you are not XNUMX%

    Something these words reminded me of? Either the comrades-in-arms of one failed Austrian artist brought to suicide, or some cosmopolitan ethnographers who adore black hats and lush vegetation at their temples :))

    Your ethnographers, in black hats, lived until the beginning of the 20th century in the Republic of Ingushetia to a certain extent. But as soon as they crossed it, they immediately became Russian. Their modern ancestors still have typically "Russian" endings in their surnames, which, however, does not prevent them from declaring themselves descendants of the Rurikovich. My comment was that any resident of RI could become Russian. Who do you think is the more Russian descendant of the Kasyanov Tatars (their khans had rights to the Moscow throne) or the ancestor of a person who crossed the Pale of Settlement in the 19th century. And in vain, you think that the French are a kind of monolith originating from the Gauls. Before Richelieu put things in order, they generally understood each other poorly. If in your understanding Russian is a direct descendant of glades, then this is your misfortune. By the way, and to whom do you classify subbotniks as Russian or Jews.?
    1. smr
      smr 2 June 2017 11: 27
      0
      I don’t know about the Kasyanov’s, but the Khan of the Kasimov’s Tatars had rights to the Golden Horde throne (since he was a Genghisid), and the “Moscow throne” was one of the Golden Horde uluses.
      1. smr
        smr 2 June 2017 11: 30
        0
        The founder of the Kasimov Khanate is Ulu-Muhammed. Both the son and grandson of Dmitry Donskoy came to him, claiming grand dignity. Khan decided the case in favor of his grandson, Vasily II Vasilyevich ..
      2. mar4047083
        mar4047083 2 June 2017 14: 11
        0
        Sorry mistake, of course, the Kasimov Tatars (by the way Orthodox). Under Ivan the Terrible, Moscow was no longer a sort of ulus. Although Moscow was previously very friendly with the Horde. They periodically killed each other (by the way, by no means on a national basis), then they got married. And of course, we dabbled in the slave trade (both sides), in those days it was a priority business. Such facts often cause shock in modern "Russians." And when they find out that their ancestors arrived because of the Pale of Settlement, in general the template breaks.
  33. gla172
    gla172 2 June 2017 13: 50
    +1
    ..... it is interesting that so many disputes erupted ..... it seems to me that there is nothing to discuss this topic at all .... because there isn’t and there weren’t any "Ukrainians" .... for example, it’s possible for the Pskovites and Vologodtsov name and say that this is a different people ....
    Article + ........
  34. mar4047083
    mar4047083 2 June 2017 14: 13
    0
    Quote: smr
    The founder of the Kasimov Khanate is Ulu-Muhammed. Both the son and grandson of Dmitry Donskoy came to him, claiming grand dignity. Khan decided the case in favor of his grandson, Vasily II Vasilyevich ..

    Semyon Bekbulatovich with Godunov add here.
  35. alexxxz
    alexxxz 2 June 2017 15: 31
    0
    rich,
    Yes and figs with him! But in the Soviet passports there was such a column ...
  36. 3 Gradient
    3 Gradient 2 June 2017 17: 30
    0
    We will not change anything ...
    Everyday...
    Our Ukrainian brothers ...
    Brainwashed ...
    If you repeat ...
    What is white. This is black.
    Over time. Believe it!
  37. mar4047083
    mar4047083 2 June 2017 18: 07
    0
    Quote: gla172
    ..... it is interesting that so many disputes erupted ..... it seems to me that there is nothing to discuss this topic at all .... because there isn’t and there weren’t any "Ukrainians" .... for example, it’s possible for the Pskovites and Vologodtsov name and say that this is a different people ....
    Article + ........

    That's for sure. Only a narrow-minded person, unable to equip his real ones, will yell about his great historical roots (although many do not even suspect what these roots are). A good deal on history must be relied upon, but one must live in the present. The example of "ukrov" is very revealing. In a country of devastation, war, garbage in our heads, and they joyfully jump under the cries of a great ancient people. they can’t even decide who the real Ukrainian is. Most of the population does not have anything to do with Bandera, but nevertheless rejoices in the new hero. Theater of the absurd: Jewish oligarchs finance the nationalists. The hero of the nation is probably spinning like a spinning top in a coffin.
  38. ZIS
    ZIS 2 June 2017 22: 16
    0
    Ukrainians have never been Russian! These are the Uniates who have renounced Orthodoxy and all Russian. Little Russians and Rusyns are these Russians; they were not worn dignified for their brothers.
  39. Torkvat torkvat
    Torkvat torkvat 3 June 2017 09: 17
    0
    Strongly disagree with the author, the division into 3 people by the Bolsheviks was a necessity, how can one make people change their mentality ?? his language? The Bolsheviks simply saved the changes and made a common state. Ukraine is a wild mixture of Romanians, Roma and Poles ... a complete lack of culture, history, statehood ... we must not "be friends" with them, but systematically clean the former Russian lands of these "brothers" ... pushing them to the Carpathians or making that their existence would be unbearable ...
  40. Barcid
    Barcid 5 June 2017 08: 09
    17
    Instructive story.
  41. NG inform
    NG inform 18 October 2017 12: 22
    0
    I came to the conclusion that Ukraine is essentially a mental drug. This concept is crazy and destructive, but to a person who falls under it giving episodic euphoria.
  42. Lexus
    Lexus 6 December 2017 12: 47
    +1
    Quote: Alikos
    Quote: vovanpain
    Quote: Red dwarf
    them and mixed with the Russians the vast majority in three fraternal countries

    My dear man, explain to me ignorant if my father is Russian, my mother is Ukrainian, and my wife is Tatar, then the question is: Who are my children by nation? I do not advise offending. yes

    By whom a person feels in spirit.
    And you are ours! )))
    Ukrainians are also our people. But in the western Ukraine, a mixture of Judeo-Hungarian rabble has always spoiled Russia since the hell knows what time.
    Unfortunately, the Russian authorities created the most favorable conditions at the expense of the normal Russian people, fed this rabble on their own and our heads, and now we got what we have.
    Warmed a snake around his neck

    When I jumped up I told my relatives that they were not Ukrainians, but ye ... Antsy. Now we do not often, but quite normally communicate. Look, after a while they will perform the Russian anthem better than the Alexandrov choir.