Military Review

How the Finns were freed from the "prison of nations"

89
100 years ago, in December 1917, Finland gained its independence. It should be remembered that the Finnish tribes have long been part of the Russian state, and the Finnish statehood was formed by Russia. A "grateful" Finns in the XX century. they wanted more and attacked Russia three times in order to create “Great Finland” at the expense of the Russian lands. And the “hottest Finnish guys” dreamed of Finland right up to the Northern Urals.


The February coup in Russia caused the collapse of the empire and the flourishing of various nationalist movements and parties. Russia began to fall apart. After the overthrow of 2 (15) in March 1917 of Emperor Nicholas II, who also bore the title of Grand Duke of Finland, the Finnish throne became free. The Provisional Government of Russia, chaired by Prince George Lvov, 7 (20) in March, 1917 issued a special manifesto about Finland, as the Russian emperor had done before. The manifesto declared the restoration of the full scope of the so-called constitution of Finland, limited to a number of manifestos and decrees of the Russian Empire. By this act, the Provisional Government of Russia solemnly reaffirmed "the Finnish people, on the basis of its constitution, the unshakable preservation of their internal independence, the rights of their national culture and languages."

13 (26) March 1917 replaced the Russified Senate Borovitinov with a new Finnish coalition Tokoy Senate (named after its chairman Oskari Tokoy). The new Senate headed for the expansion of autonomy. The Provisional Government tried to discourage this, but without success. The crisis of the Russian government has strengthened the position of the Finnish separatists. At the height of the July crisis in Petrograd, the Finnish Parliament declared the independence of the Grand Duchy of Finland in internal affairs and limited the competence of the Russian Provisional Government to military and foreign policy issues. 5 (18) in July, when the outcome of the Bolshevik uprising in Petrograd was not clear, the Finnish Parliament approved a social democratic project on the transfer of supreme power to itself. However, this law on the restoration of the autonomous rights of Finland was rejected by the Provisional Government of Russia, the parliament of Finland was dissolved, and its building was occupied by Russian troops.

4 (17) September 1917 was appointed the new governor-general of Finland - Nikolai Nekrasov. On September 8, the last Finnish senate was formed, with Russian control over it - the Senate of Setel. Negotiations on the expansion of Finland’s rights continued until the fall of the Provisional Government. After the Bolsheviks seized power in Petrograd, 15 November 1917, the Finnish parliament declared itself the supreme state power. The Senate of Setel has resigned; on November 27, the Senate of the new composition met under the chairmanship of Per Evinda Svinhuvud.

4 December 1917 this Senate submitted to Parliament a draft of a new form of government “To the people of Finland” - a draft of a new form of government in Finland, which was later called the “Declaration of Finnish Independence”. 6 December The said project approved the Finnish Parliament by voting 100 against 88. This day became the national holiday of Finland Independence Day.

18 (31) December The Soviet government recognized the independence of Finland. In response to the appeal of the Finnish government recognizing the independence of Finland, the Council of People's Commissars (SNK) adopted a corresponding decree "in full agreement with the principles of the right of nations to self-determination." On behalf of the Soviet government, the document was signed by Chairman of the SNK Vladimir Lenin, People's Commissar of Internal Affairs Grigory Petrovsky, People's Commissar for Nationalities Joseph Stalin, People's Commissar for Foreign Affairs Lev Trotsky, People's Commissar of Justice Isaac Steinberg, People's Commissar Vladimir Karelin, People's Commissar of Food Alexander Shlichter, Director of the SNK Vladimir Bonch-Bruyevich and Secretary of the SNK, Nikolai Gorbunov.

To develop activities that entailed the separation of Finland from Russia, it was proposed to organize a special commission of representatives from both sides. The resolution of the Council of People's Commissars personally received in the Smolny the government delegation of Finland headed by Per Evind Svinhovud, the prime minister of the newly formed state. Soviet Russia became the first power to recognize Finland’s independence. December 22 (January 4 1918), on the day the Central Executive Committee ratified this decree, the independence of Finland was also recognized by France, Sweden and Germany.

Thus, Finland became an independent state. At the same time, Finland was immediately made an “anti-Russian ram.” First, Finland entered into the sphere of influence of Germany (the Second Reich), then the "Western democracies" and again Germany - the Third Reich.

How the Finns were freed from the "prison of nations"

Provisional state flag of Finland 06.12.1917 — 29.05.1918

Since 1947, when a peace treaty was concluded in Paris, by 1991, the relations between the Republic of Finland and the USSR were quite peaceful and good-neighborly. The Finns got a good lesson when they tried to solve their territorial disputes with Russia with the help of Hitler. It can be said with confidence that the current prosperity and well-being of a relatively small Finnish people in a forest country was mainly achieved through trade and the fulfillment of orders from the Soviet Union (Russia). The Finns skillfully took advantage of the neighborhood with a great Soviet civilization and became one of the most prosperous countries in the world. At the same time, they spent a small amount on defense.

At the same time, in the Soviet Union, where, after Stalin, the leadership took a course towards gradual reconciliation with the West, in order not to offend the offensive Finns, by default it began to turn a blind eye to the three wars that were caused by the aggressive and anti-Russian policy of Finland. This was quite easy to do, since the war with Finland was overshadowed by the truly titanic Great Patriotic War. And the fights with the Finns seemed like minor fights in the background historical The Moscow, Stalingrad and Kursk battles, the defense of Leningrad and Sevastopol, the liberation of Europe and the capture of Koenigsberg and Berlin, as well as the defeat of the Japanese army in Manchuria, etc.

On the other hand was created the myth of "the aggression of the Soviet Union" during the Winter War. With the beginning of the so-called. "Perestroika" on the Soviet reader and viewer came down with a whole ninth wave of misinformation and "revelations" about the "crimes of Stalin", the "aggression of the huge USSR" against the "small peaceful country", the alleged defeat and huge losses of the Red Army, etc. Anti-Soviet myths about The Winter War became one of the most brilliant examples in the history of informational and psychological wars. The pro-Western, liberal publicists and writers quite easily deceived the people who knew almost nothing about the wars with Finland. Instead of fascist Finland of the 1930s model, where local Nazis dreamed of "Great Finland" at the expense of Russian lands, the layman was slipped into peaceful Finland of 1960-1990s. After all, people did not know that the symbols of the then Finland were the Finnish swastika, the Shyutskor - the security corps (Finnish SS), the concentration camps and the local Fuhrer - Marshal Mannerheim. Nowadays, the Swedish baron Mannerheim is trying to make part of the Russian “elite” a hero of “old Russia”, who opposed the “bloody commissars” who allegedly destroyed the Russian autocracy and the Russian empire, destroying the “best part” of the Russian people.

At the same time, Western liberals and other Russophobes keep quiet that the Finnish radicals were going to hold the border of “Great Finland” across the Northern Urals or even the Yenisei. At the Finnish ruling elite, appetites were “more modest” - all of Karelia, the entire Kola Peninsula, a part of the Leningrad, Vologda and Arkhangelsk regions. Also, the liberals are silent about the fact that Finland collaborated with Kaiser Germany, and then with the Entente against Soviet Russia, and the Finnish wars of 1918-1922. and 1941-1944 That the Finnish army is responsible for the starvation of hundreds of thousands of people in besieged Leningrad. However, the liberal and pro-Western media prefer to keep silent about this, the public, because otherwise you have to admit that “little peace-loving” Finland itself attacked huge Russia, taking advantage of its temporary difficulties and did it solely for the sake of territorial acquisitions and with the support of the owners of leading Western powers.

How did the Finns become part of Russia

In order to understand the history of Finland in the 20th century, it is necessary to know its past. By the beginning of the 9th century, Finno-Ugric tribes occupied a large part of Northern Europe from the Gulf of Bothnia to the Urals. Looking at all, already at the time of Prince Rurik, most of the Finno-Ugric tribes entered the sphere of influence of the Russian state. Most of Finland was part of the state of Rurik-Sokol. In X - XII centuries. Finnish tribes living in the territories of modern Finland and Karelia paid tribute to Novgorod and their lands were considered the property of Mr Novgorod the Great.

Thus, the Finnish and Karelian tribes became part of the Russian state as early as the period of the formation of the Rurik Empire, simultaneously with the Finno-Ugrians of Murom, Meshcher, Izhora and other lands.

Is it possible to call the movement of Russians (Rus) in the habitat of the Finno-Ugric tribes aggression? No, although it is clear that business did not do without conflicts, this is natural. Russian colonization, civilization and state development was fundamentally different from Western colonization and expansion. Russians saw in people of other nationalities, cultures and races the same people as themselves. So it was the Russian multinational civilization, where everyone had a place. Moreover, the Russians were not “masters”, “white masters”, representatives of the “highest caste” for “people of the second or third grade”, “subhumans”. Western civilization, being a parasite, captures, robs and uses foreign resources and "energy", up to the extinction and even the complete destruction of the "donor". Other peoples, tribes and cultures are completely destroyed, partially subjected to complete absorption. At the same time, there is a clear separation between "gentlemen" and "two-legged tools."

For example, the German and Swedish colonization in Eastern and Northern Europe was reduced to the plunder of foreign resources, military occupation with the creation of strongholds of the invaders - castles, fortresses, where knights and their retinue, attendants lived. The surrounding population was forcibly turned into serfs - in fact, into slaves, "two-legged tools." Also, Aboriginal people were forcibly Christianized, in order to deprive them of the "sources" that give vent to resistance, introduced a foreign language, like a state written language. Natives who tried to resist, destroyed in all possible ways, hung up, burned at the stake, chopped into pieces, drowned, etc.

Russian colonization was of a different type. The Russians did not separate the locals from themselves - this was expressed in the general military and economic activities, common families, etc. Naturally, there were military conflicts, this is inevitable. But in general, the colonization took place peacefully, as the Russians did not suppress the Finnish tribes. The north was poorly populated, which allowed it to be implemented almost painlessly, everyone found it to their liking. The Russians did not make the locals serfs or slaves; the tribute imposed on them was small. And the Russians themselves paid their princes and posadnik. It may be noted that Novgorod in the 10th - 13th centuries. they did not build fortresses and castles in the area of ​​the Neva River, in Karelia and in Southern Finland. This was not necessary, the Russians were not occupiers, who feared rebellion and needed strong military support in a hostile environment.

In addition, Christianity in Russia took root relatively slowly. For centuries the Russians themselves adhered to dual faith, that is, they carried crosses, but celebrated pagan festivals, performed ancient rites, offerings to the gods. Christianity for a long time could not stand firmly in the North and East of Russia. Thus, in the Novgorod land, most of the population was formal Christians and even pagans, worshiping both Christ and Perun. The church itself, not having the opportunity, conducted missionary activities sluggishly and relatively peacefully. That is, the Finns were not threatened with harsh and total Christianization with “fire and sword,” when death was waiting for all dissenters.

To be continued ...
Author:
89 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. Same lech
    Same lech 7 December 2017 06: 17
    +3
    If Russification is not carried out on time in key authorities of the respective territories, the population will inevitably be de-Russified throughout this territory, followed by exclusion from RUSSIA ... history has proved this more than once.
    1. venaya
      venaya 7 December 2017 07: 01
      +5
      Quote: The same LYOKHA
      If you do not carry out Russification on time .. will inevitably be carried out derusification of the population ..

      Here’s the thing: no tribes except Russians in the XNUMXth century, according to recent studies, have been noticed in this territory, here the author got an error, apparently used outdated data. The fact is that all over nowadays "Europe" (earlier Rus, Porussia or Veney even Aeneas) dominated by Russian tribes, and in today's Finland it was the same as the language used by the population. So in the days of the early Rurikovichs, the entire population in those places was exclusively both Russian and Russian-speaking, however, as in the territory of modern as we now call "Germany." Unfortunately, the overwhelming majority of authors do not want to notice this fact yet, but it’s time, after all, we live in the XNUMXst century, the relevant information is already “above the roof”.
      1. solzh
        solzh 7 December 2017 13: 10
        +6
        The fact is that all over now "Europe" (previously Rus, Porussia or Veney even Aeneas) dominated by Russian tribes, and in today's Finland it was the same

        No one confirms this, except for such cranks as Khinevich, Grinevich, Vashkevich, and other scientific gang-brethren.
        1. venaya
          venaya 7 December 2017 13: 43
          +3
          Quote: solzh
          No one confirms this, .. and other about scientific gang-brethren.

          In vain do you speak of numerous scientific disciplines, such as linguistics, DNA gynealogy, archaeological research and others. Yes, and on this account there are miraculously preserved written sources after countless pseudo-random fires, although they are already not very numerous. Apparently you just this topic is not interesting and not close. By the way, why do you care so much about all this? Are there any other, additional interests here for you? Indeed, in recent years, a lot of materials have been accumulated on this subject in many scientific disciplines, apparently you are simply not familiar with these studies.
          1. solzh
            solzh 7 December 2017 14: 23
            0
            I relate very well to the listed scientific disciplines and respect them. About
            why do you care so much? Are there any other, additional interests here for you?
            I will answer you with a question. Are you familiar with organizations such as CTF and MTR SRV? They issued a joint official statement of December 25, 2009
            "On the substitution of concepts in the language and history of the Slavs and on pseudo-paganism." Full text here http://www.rodnovery.ru/dokumenty/o-podmenakh-pon
            yatij I completely share their views. I hope I explained to you my position on this issue. Yours faithfully,
            PS I agree with you that today there are really a lot of different facts about the history of the Russian people, from academician Rybakov to his student Pletnev
            1. venaya
              venaya 7 December 2017 15: 06
              +3
              Quote: solzh
              To date, there have indeed been a lot of different facts about the history of the Russian people, starting from Academician Rybakov and to his student Pletnev

              Sorry, but and what religion in general? After all, I did not touch on this topic at all, here on the site there are too many religious fans and they will never be convinced of anything. As for Rybakov and his followers, since he, as an academician, had too few opportunities to publish his studies and had to artificially limit them. The topic is complex, associated with internal problems in the Academy itself, by the way not yet resolved. This organization is not only clearly tendentious, but also has many fundamental internal problems that are not yet solvable or resolved. Today there is already just a shaft of fresh, unfortunately often not yet published information on this topic, which I partially managed to familiarize myself with. And from the point of view of religious issues, even here, on the site, the most ancient goddess of ancient Rus - Makosh, who has already been for many ten millennia, completely does not want to recognize Russian. The religious fanaticism of today's religious fans of totalitarian sects rolls over and is absolutely insane. Examples of Ishilovites and other countless fanatics, and they have nothing to stop at. So I consider operating with religions too dangerous today, even for life, so I try to rely only on numerous purely scientific studies in all available disciplines of science, without often imposed trends, which unfortunately are many. Please try to approach this issue from a purely scientific point of view, it is simpler, more reliable and safer.
              1. solzh
                solzh 7 December 2017 15: 25
                +1
                I have not affected religion. I cited these organizations due to the fact that they are engaged in research of Russian history and they cooperate with scientific organizations. They have a fairly large contribution to questions of Russian history. But you (do not think that I blame you or insult you) in this case, the statement is a point of view that is far from science, and that has nothing to do with the history of the Russian people. About the same as saying that the ancient Ukrainians dug up the Black Sea. In my comments, I got the impression that you are trying to defend or rather convey to the readers of VO the thoughts of the pseudo-scientist Chudinov, whose scientific works do not find understanding, but are rejected by the scientific community. I gave you Rybakova as an example due to the fact that today in our country, there are very few who understand and know the history of the Russian people. Rybakova did not allow himself to cite any additional expressions in the form of a historical axiom, which you speak of in your comments. Sorry if I do not write very well, because I am leaving a comment from a cell phone.
                1. venaya
                  venaya 7 December 2017 18: 24
                  +3
                  Quote: solzh
                  You are .. in this case, the statement of the point of view is far from science, and to the history of the Russian people has nothing to do.

                  Wow! It turns out that science has the right to be exclusively occupied by people who are admitted to this occupation, and the rest, and many, many thousands of them, have no right to do this, because they have not received permission from anyone. Look: you regularly translate the question either to specific personalities, then to religious figures, or to specific academics, and not according to the profiles to which I refer, but to DNA gyneologists, linguists and archaeologists, by the way specifically dealing with this topic. It seems that you have a certain interest in the final conclusions on this topic, and this already smells not at all of science, but rather of politics, which in this case I do not want to engage in. I’m more interested in the conclusions of specific experts on this topic than the opinion of a certain, albeit authoritative organization, for this may smack of tendentiousness, for reasons unknown to me. So please do not ascribe that I did not write and could not write, I always try to be independent of the dirty deeds of any organizations and try to be responsible for my words. I believe that in this case it’s not possible to attribute bias to me, it’s true - in the end, it will break its way, and I will help it in this.
                  1. Hantengri
                    Hantengri 7 December 2017 20: 19
                    +1
                    [quote = venaya
                    Wow! It turns out that science has the right to be exclusively occupied by people who are admitted to this occupation, and the rest, and many, many thousands of them, have no right to do this, because they have not received permission from someone. [/ Quote]
                    Dear Venia! And shaw, after all, can you, freshly, say for the origin of the secondary density maximum in clusters of galaxies? Nothing? And why? Think it over. Maybe you’ll understand what ... I’ll hint: If a cook is forced to solve problems in the MMF, and the theoretician’s physics cooks a soup, or (God forbid) fix a vacuum cleaner, then the result of “creativity” can, in most cases, be safely sent to Benena’s mother.
                    Quote: venaya
                    and not on the profiles to which I refer, but on DNA gyneologists, linguists and archaeologists, by the way specifically dealing with this particular topic.

                    Here, about the pseudo-science of DNA "geneology": https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XBUWM9jPPT8 (scientifically popular, but that's enough for you). lol
                    Here, you, educational program on linguistics: http: //elementy.ru/nauchno-populyarna
                    ya_biblioteka / 430720/430720
                    But you will neither read nor watch ... For you are "a shit" of science and the scientific method. Are you religious.
                    1. venaya
                      venaya 7 December 2017 21: 25
                      +3
                      I understand that as V. Vysotsky sang, "The giraffe is big, he knows better ..". So it always seems to you that everything is visible from a palm, everything is visible much better than to specialists in specific fields of science. Is Baku a new center of world science? My boss is forced to fly to Boston almost weekly, there you see half of the Nobel Prize winners settled down, invent and invent everything, and you can’t keep up with them, you can’t even copy my nickname competently. on this account are available. For all this, I constantly refer to outright jerks-hohmachs, even sometimes with academic titles, which unfortunately have not been divorced at the present time. So think at your leisure, it’s worth you to intervene in discussions of serious people on serious topics, what you Troll - so it is noticeable, and for a long time. I think that moderators should take a closer look at people like you to draw the necessary conclusions. What I write about new sciences has long been recognized at all levels, not only scientific but also administrative, and to you as a pro troll this circumstance haunts. Take a sedative, hide yourself somewhere in the aul and stop serious people from discussing issues that are relevant to them. For your health reasons, even people’s nicknames can’t be written correctly, and you’re still going to learn everything with such baggage. Better take a break from this site, think about your health, not all of this, too tough and not intellectually. I hope that you will not be offended, in truth there is nothing to be offended ..
                      1. Hantengri
                        Hantengri 8 December 2017 00: 06
                        +2
                        Quote: venaya
                        I understand that as V. Vysotsky sang, "The giraffe is big, he knows better ..". So it always seems to you that everything is visible from a palm, everything is visible much better than to specialists in specific fields of science.

                        Especially for the illiterate, I repeat: in normal science there is such an unpleasant thing as the scientific method (if you do not know, then enlighten): https://dic.academic.ru/dic.nsf/ruwiki/22530 and if something doesn’t Corresponds .... That - to Benena’s mother ...
                        By the way, I will repeat the question about specific areas of science: What is such a “cook” as you can say new to the topic “The problem of the secondary density maximum in clusters of galactitics.”? Well, let's go! I’m very interested in your opinion (I’ll suddenly emphasize a four-thread useful for a dissertation) laughing ! After all, it doesn’t matter that I was taught astrophysics, but you did what you were taught! laughing You are UNIVERSAL SPECIALITES! Alternatively gifted to you - everything is up to you! For example, I will not undertake to calculate the seismic stability of the building (I was taught different), but you, in the company of Klesov, Chudinov and Fomenko, are two fingers on the asphalt! Is not it? wassat lol
                        Quote: venaya
                        Is Baku a new center of world science?

                        What does Baku have to do with it?
                        Quote: venaya
                        My boss is forced to fly to Boston almost weekly, there you see half of the Nobel Prize winners (E diplomas!) Prizes have settled down, everyone invents and invents,

                        You, with each of his flights, become smarter and smarter? wassat laughing
                        Quote: venaya
                        For all this, I constantly refer to outright jerks-hohmachs, even sometimes with academic titles, which unfortunately have not been divorced at the present time.

                        This is A. Zaliznyak. "frank moron" ?! laughing Andrei Anatolievich Zaliznyak (born April 29, 1935, Moscow) is a Soviet and Russian linguist, academician of the Russian Academy of Sciences in the Department of Literature and Language (1997), doctor of philological sciences (1965, defending his thesis). Winner of the State Prize of Russia 2007. He was awarded the Big Gold Medal named after M.V. Lomonosov RAS (2007). Known for his work in the field of Russian word formation and accentology. Researcher of Novgorod birch bark letters and "Words about Igor's Regiment". One of the founders of the Moscow school of comparative studies] .https: //ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/За
                        Liznyak, _Andrey_Anatolevich
                        Oh well...
                        Quote: venaya
                        You are a Troll - so it is noticeable, and for a long time. I think that moderators should take a closer look at people like you to draw the necessary conclusions.

                        Moderators, no matter how, without the alternatively gifted will decide what to do with me. hi
                        Quote: venaya
                        What I write about new sciences has long been recognized at all levels, not only scientific but also administrative

                        Links to scientific articles and their official recognition, plizz!
                        Quote: venaya
                        Take a sedative, hide yourself somewhere in the aul and stop serious people from discussing issues that are relevant to them.

                        Hamish, boy!
                    2. Pancir026
                      Pancir026 8 December 2017 13: 14
                      +1
                      Quote: HanTengri
                      Dear Venia! And shaw, after all, can you, freshly, say for the origin of the secondary density maximum in clusters of galaxies? Nothing

                      Exactly.
                      This is a crutch to help him, maybe something he will understand.
                      In 1917, Soviet Russia granted Finland independence (for the first time in its history). It was the Council of People's Commissars that was the first government in the world to recognize the existence of the sovereign Republic of Finland. But the Russians did not wait for thanks from the Finns. Local "whites", relying on the army of Kaiser Germany, staged a monstrous massacre of the Social Democrats, who supported the officially recognized Revolutionary Government of Finland.
                      http://svpressa.ru/post/article/187600/
      2. Monarchist
        Monarchist 7 December 2017 19: 03
        0
        Kamrad venaya ,, neither you nor I nor anyone else can not confirm or deny this information
        1. venaya
          venaya 7 December 2017 19: 41
          +2
          Quote: Monarchist
          .. no one .. can not confirm or deny this information

          What specific information do you mean? Maybe Old about the ethnic composition of the inhabitants in those distant times (IX-XI centuries) in the territory on which the state of Finland is now located? So what is today's science doing, because it is its direct responsibility to collect the corresponding information, they get paid for it, and DNA gyneologists and their analysts have already published a lot of what is allowed. Yes, I agree, much of what has long been known for political or other reasons is hidden from the majority of the public, but this does not mean that no one still knows anything, it’s just that this knowledge is not yet allowed for wide publication, but for what I really don’t know the reason, and if I publish something on my own from a rather rarely covered one, this is my personal initiative. The modern science of the XNUMXst century has really gone far ahead, it is a pity that many more do not realize it. What I am writing is already published and those who wish can freely familiarize themselves with it if there is a desire, so I am quite able to confirm this information, referring to the relevant specialized studies.
      3. Romin
        Romin 8 December 2017 01: 57
        0
        What???
        Please type in the search engine Ingermanlandii (Ingria).
        This is now part of the Leningrad Region.
        I think, be surprised.
        And, perhaps, you may want to study the history of your own country.
        I’ll also tell you a secret: the sign of the Cross (constriction) was originally two-fingered and was adopted at the Baptism of Russia, was valid until 1656 (was condemned at the Council) ...
        And the three-fingered is accepted only from the church reform of Patriarch Nikon, as well as many church rules, which lost their ties with the original principles of the Baptism of Russia.
        This is what I know and love ....;) No offense;)
  2. venaya
    venaya 7 December 2017 07: 27
    +3
    To the beginning XNUMXth century Finno-Ugric tribes occupied a significant part of northern Europe from the Gulf of Bothnia to the Urals. Apparently, already at the time of Prince Rurik, most of the Finno-Ugric tribes entered the sphere of influence of the Russian state. Most of Finland was part of the Rurik-Sokol state. In the X - XII centuries. Finnish tribes ..

    How do you want articles on HE to reflect modern knowledge in many areas of the current state of scientific disciplines. I note that in the 60th century this territory was not settled by “Ugro-Finnish tribes” at all, the fact is that in modern Finland today mostly (1%) representatives of a rather rare variety of Ugro-Finns live, namely Karelian-Finns (a special haplogroup, genus N1c1) and for the first time they began to populate this territory no earlier than the 1th century, gradually increasing their number and percentage in the general population. By definition, no Finnish or, more precisely, Karelian-Finnish language could be there before, there weren’t native speakers of such a language. And the settlement took place from now (from the 1th century) the territory of the Baltic, and in those days, the coasts of the Varyazhsk Sea or foreigners called it the Venetian Gulf, because the same Venets lived everywhere, that is, in essence, as it is now customary to say just Russes. Even the name of the country "Finland" (in the dialect - Venland) - indicates that the Venets themselves lived there and partially now live. but with the language it is interesting to know% state and Karelian-Finnish and there is no recent Swedish language coming from, and there are less than XNUMX% of Swedes there. Here are miracles and more! And in the Urals, completely different tribes of Finno-Finns live (genus, haplogroup NXNUMXbXNUMX), and their language is different, not Karelian-Finnish, but like in present-day Hungary, that is, the "Uralic language group", because they once captured.
    1. Curious
      Curious 7 December 2017 13: 52
      +3
      I join !!! How would I want articles on VO to reflect modern knowledge in many areas of the current state of scientific disciplines, and not sacred and mythological utopias, Scientological visions of admirers of the Dancing Spirit cult mixed with the teachings of Daniel Andreev.
  3. parusnik
    parusnik 7 December 2017 07: 32
    +1
    The most interesting is ahead .. We look forward to continuing ...
    1. venaya
      venaya 7 December 2017 07: 48
      +5
      Quote: parusnik
      The most interesting is ahead ..

      It is a pity that we will not find out here at VO how and how, since the autumn of 1917, on the territory of the Grand Duchy of Finland, it has been openly persecution as native speakers of the Russian language, and the autochthonous (indigenous) language for the local population itself. This happened both in the presence and possibly the participation of Kaiser troops and British intelligence, but this topic is especially interesting and instructive for us. It is desirable to know this story in great detail, because even today it is still very relevant. You should never step on the same rake, especially repeatedly and without corresponding very useful conclusions, which unfortunately is still happening now.
  4. Nikitin
    Nikitin 7 December 2017 07: 45
    +8
    In response to an appeal from the Finnish government on the recognition of Finland's independence, the Council of People's Commissars (SNK) adopted an appropriate resolution "in full accordance with the principles of the right of nations to self-determination"

    NEVER Finland appealed to the Council of People's Commissars for recognition of independence. Never.
    Appeal was to To the Constituent Assembly of Russia.

    T.N. "Sovnarkom" CAM got out with his confession.

    Creating myths to fight myths is strange.
    1. long in stock.
      long in stock. 7 December 2017 08: 16
      +1
      Seriously? that is, in your understanding, the constituent assembly and the people's council existed in parallel?
      1. Nikitin
        Nikitin 7 December 2017 09: 43
        +4
        Quote: long in stock.
        Seriously? that is, in your understanding, the constituent assembly and the people's council existed in parallel?

        In the world of FACTS, the so-called was not recognized as a “people's commissar” by NIKEM, that is, it did NOT exist, incl. and for Finns -They did not recognize the octpatch. Therefore, they turned to the US of Russia.
      2. RUSS
        RUSS 7 December 2017 10: 02
        +2
        Quote: long in stock.
        Seriously? that is, in your understanding, the constituent assembly and the people's council existed in parallel?

        Are you not familiar with the concept of "dual power"?
        Dual power regime in Russia After the February Revolution of 1917, two bodies of power arose simultaneously in Russia: the Soviets of workers 'and soldiers' deputies, which were the beginnings of people's power, and the Provisional Government, the organ of the dictatorship of the bourgeoisie.
  5. Deck
    Deck 7 December 2017 07: 48
    +4
    The author resembles the cat Matroskin; We survived ... We can say that we found, washed, cleaned it from the rubbish dump - and he paints us with figs!
  6. Whispering in the night
    Whispering in the night 7 December 2017 09: 15
    +4
    How the Finns were freed from the "prison of nations"


    The term "prison of peoples" in relation to the Russian Empire is vile and dirty slander, the beginning of which was laid in the West, and home-grown characters like Vladimir Ulyanov, this business was picked up with pleasure and continued.
  7. Nikitin
    Nikitin 7 December 2017 10: 01
    +8
    . The Finnish ruling elite had “more modest” appetites — all of Karelia, all of the Kola Peninsula, part of the Leningrad, Vologda and Arkhangelsk regions. Also, the liberals are silent that Finland collaborated with Kaiser Germany, and then the Entente against Soviet Russia, in the Finnish wars of 1918-1922. and 1941-1944

    The Communists are always silent about the REASONS of all the Soviet-Finnish wars: when the SNK recognized the independence of Finland, NOBODY made a word about the BORDER between the countries.
    But this should have been discussed primarily before recognition. So that there are no statements, this is Finnish land; the statement is Russian land!
    But the Bolsheviks were in a hurry to prove themselves as a power-DO US. Revealed. The result is two terrible Soviet-Finnish wars.
    It should be noted that, recognizing the independence of Finland, the Bolsheviks sent troops, weapons, money there to fight with ... the government they recognized! Not everyone liked it ....
    1. Alexey RA
      Alexey RA 7 December 2017 15: 21
      +1
      Quote: Nikitin-
      The Communists are always silent about the REASONS of all the Soviet-Finnish wars: when the SNK recognized the independence of Finland, NOBODY made a word about the BORDER between the countries.
      But this should have been discussed primarily before recognition. So that there are no statements, this is Finnish land; the statement is Russian land!

      And were there any options? The Vyborg lianas were transferred to the VKF even under the “bald dandy”.
      There were requests to move the border back to Imperial times (St. Petersburg at the Gulf of Finland began to rest against the VKF border) - and all without result.
  8. kvs207
    kvs207 7 December 2017 10: 17
    +1
    Quote: Nikitin-
    Quote: long in stock.
    Seriously? that is, in your understanding, the constituent assembly and the people's council existed in parallel?

    In the world of FACTS, the so-called was not recognized as a “people's commissar” by NIKEM, that is, it did NOT exist, incl. and for Finns -They did not recognize the octpatch. Therefore, they turned to the US of Russia.

    That is, for the Finns, the Council of People's Commissars did not exist, but his decision was put into practice? The strange logic of these Finns.
    1. Nikitin
      Nikitin 8 December 2017 13: 38
      +2
      Quote: kvs207
      That is, for the Finns, the Council of People's Commissars did not exist, but his decision was put into practice? The strange logic of these Finns.

      What is so strange? Just USED these "wiseacres".
      Like the rest of the nationals
  9. Curious
    Curious 7 December 2017 12: 11
    +3
    "At the same time, it is worth remembering that the Finnish tribes have long been part of the Russian state."
    “In order to understand Finland’s history in the XNUMXth century, you need to know its past. By the beginning of the XNUMXth century, Finno-Ugric tribes hired a significant part of Northern Europe from the Gulf of Bothnia to the Urals. Apparently, already during the time of Prince Rurik, most of the Finno-Ugric tribes included the sphere of influence of the Russian state. "

    The author fights for the cause of truth with the use of, let’s say, untruth.
    In the days of Rurik there was no Russian power yet. The Russian centralized state was formed by the end of the XNUMXth century.
    1. Gopnik
      Gopnik 7 December 2017 13: 18
      +2
      In the days of Rurik, it may not have been, and a little after completely - the Russian land, under the rule of the Rurikovich's house, headed by the Grand Duke. With varying degrees of decentralization.
      1. Curious
        Curious 7 December 2017 13: 37
        +1
        600 - 700 years - is it "a little after" for you?
        1. Gopnik
          Gopnik 7 December 2017 13: 47
          0
          Not 600-700, but at least with St. Vladimir, i.e. no later than 100 years from Rurik
          1. Curious
            Curious 7 December 2017 13: 55
            +2
            Clear. Then you can not work. True to Vladimir Svyatoy your co-religionists the Ukrainian title of the ancient Ukrainian prince staked out.
            1. Gopnik
              Gopnik 7 December 2017 13: 59
              +1
              Quote: Curious
              Clear


              Sincerely glad

              Quote: Curious
              Then you can not work.


              Thank you for allowing.

              Quote: Curious
              The truth is behind Vladimir the Holy Your co-religionists the Ukrainian title of the ancient Ukrainian prince staked out


              Well, it's their problem that they staked out there. They also staked the Buddha and Heracles and dug up the Black Sea, in the know
              1. Curious
                Curious 7 December 2017 14: 07
                +1
                This is not only their problem. These are your joint problems. But this is still beyond your and their perception. It is the same if present-day Germany and France began to appropriate the history of the French state.
                1. Gopnik
                  Gopnik 7 December 2017 14: 20
                  +1
                  Quote: Curious
                  These are your joint problems.


                  Yes, we somehow have no particular problems

                  Quote: Curious
                  It is the same if present-day Germany and France began to appropriate the history of the French state.


                  And do you think from what period they lead the history of their states? From the Frankish state and lead. And from the official section thereof, with Karl Lysy and Louis the German, this is the only way. And what does it mean to “appropriate”, from whom did they appropriate?
                  1. Curious
                    Curious 7 December 2017 14: 39
                    +1
                    The fact of the matter is that they "lead". However, no one thought of the state that existed before the Verdun Treaty, declare the German state or the French state.
                    1. Gopnik
                      Gopnik 7 December 2017 14: 48
                      +1
                      Of course, because it is their common, officer-but divided into three parts. Therefore, these parts are only theirs, and the common state before the partition is their common history, which they cannot assign to one alone, but which they do not refuse. And they equally honor the same Charlemagne.
                      With Russia, everything is simpler - there was no section, like Verdun, like that. In fact, there was a collapse, but only one part has continuous state continuity, the rest, which have fallen away, simply ceased to exist as a state. subjects
                      1. Curious
                        Curious 7 December 2017 14: 56
                        +1
                        There was a testament of Yaroslav, there was a congress in Lyubec, the process did not go on its own. And the statement of continuous state succession and termination of existence ... You yourself understand from what area this statement is. Or do not understand. In historical terms, this does not change anything. So we finish this run in a circle of history. All the best to successors of statehood of different states.
      2. Operator
        Operator 7 December 2017 23: 04
        0
        The first state (in the sense of non-clan-tribal) formation of the Eastern Slavs was called Ruska Zemlya and was created by Prince Rurik on the territory of the Slovenian tribe with its center in Novgorod.

        In the future, the state of Ruska Zemlya expanded its territory by joining the places of residence of Krivichy, Vyatichi, Polyany, Drevlyan, etc. Prince Igor Rurikovich transferred the capital of the Russian Earth to Kiev.

        Beginning in the eleventh century, feudal fragmentation began to grow in the state of Ruska Zemlya, but the state did not break up into several entities (for example, as the empire of Charlemagne), because in Russia, unlike Europe, a platype was acting - the princes owned princedoms not by right of patrimony (hereditary property) ), and on the right of inheritance (temporary use), and obeyed the Grand Duke of Kiev (the life-long head of state, Russian Land).

        Even after falling under the Mongol yoke (a form of feudal dependence) and abolishing ladder law, the Russian state remained - the Mongol khans issued a label for the great reign of the head of state, to which the specific princes obeyed. The capital was where the next owner of the label reigned.

        After the abolition of the yoke, the grand duke (at that time Moscow) automatically became the sovereign head of state. After some time, the Grand Duke of Moscow declared himself king (Caesar). Part of the Russian state was torn away by Lithuania and Poland (Belarus and Little Russia) and was reunited in the XVII-XVIII centuries.

        In 1721, the Tsar of Russia proclaimed himself the Emperor of Russia, and the Kingdom of Russia, respectively, the Russian Empire. In 1917, as a result of the revolution, the Russian Republic was formed, then the RSFSR, then the USSR.

        In 1991, as a result of the separation of the USSR, the Russian Federation, Ukraine, Belarus, etc. were formed, while the Russian Federation at the UN officially proclaimed itself the "successor of the USSR" (respectively, the RSFSR, RR, RI, TsR, VKM and Ruska Zemlya).
  10. Dimmih
    Dimmih 7 December 2017 13: 10
    +5
    Quote: venaya
    Quote: parusnik
    The most interesting is ahead ..

    It is a pity that we will not find out here at VO how and how, since the autumn of 1917, on the territory of the Grand Duchy of Finland, it has been openly persecution as native speakers of the Russian language, and the autochthonous (indigenous) language for the local population itself. This happened both in the presence and possibly the participation of Kaiser troops and British intelligence, but this topic is especially interesting and instructive for us. It is desirable to know this story in great detail, because even today it is still very relevant. You should never step on the same rake, especially repeatedly and without corresponding very useful conclusions, which unfortunately is still happening now.

    What kind of passions do you write, native Russian for native Finns, Russian autochthons in Finland, Jesus ... I don’t even know, is Fomenkovism or harder ...
    1. venaya
      venaya 7 December 2017 14: 30
      +3
      Quote: Dimmih
      What kind of passion do you write, native Russian for native Finns, Russian autochthons in Finland ..

      What are you writing about, what else "indigenous finns"in the XNUMXth century? The term" Finland "itself does not originate from the Karelian-Finnish language, but has a purely Russian-language origin. We recall the etymology of such names as Vienna, Venice, the provinces of Italy Venetto and France Vendée, where until now Venets live. Yes, and in the Finnish language, our modern term is Russia, the Russian Federation, etc. It is written as "Russia", where does my own nickname" venaya "come from, with Russian and Russian speakers = venäläinen и venäjänkielinen. The same thing in modern Estonian Russia = Russia. As far as I understand, you are not familiar with this topic or it is simply not interesting to you. By the way, Russian tribes lived in those places for a long time, for example, in the center of St. Petersburg they unearthed an ancient settlement as old as 7 thousand years old, in shape reminiscent of "Fort Ros" in the once Russian America. And the fact that countless traces of the most ancient forms were discovered there, such as stony writing (the Lake Ladoga region), drawings, and huge megalith constructions. Just take an interest in this topic, now a lot of interesting and entertaining information is already available. And you are all some private surnames, it resembles a form of explicit zombies, but this phenomenon should be fought, it’s time already. So the very term “Finns” and “Finland” are directly related to the Russian language and have no connection with the Finno-Ugric languages ​​themselves. And the term "Finland" is simply a common distortion of the terms "Wen"land ", that is, the country of Venets, so often used to be called Russ for some time, and the" Varyazhskoe Sea "(now, recently, the Baltic) also had the name Venetian Gulf, since Venets lived for a long time there. Scandinavia is distorted "sve" and now "svens" (svens, or Swedes). Take an interest in all of this, unless of course it is personally interesting to you personally. So the root ones there are essentially venets and not in the newspeak "finns" who are under this name appeared no earlier than the 1917th century, for a country like Finland only appeared in XNUMX and it never existed before.
      1. RUSS
        RUSS 7 December 2017 15: 29
        +2
        That's right, the Finns themselves call themselves Suomi.
  11. Glory1974
    Glory1974 7 December 2017 16: 22
    0
    the current prosperity and well-being of a relatively small Finnish people in a forest country was largely achieved through trade and the fulfillment of orders from the Soviet Union

    Unfortunately, not only the history of past centuries is hushed up, but modern history is at least silent. And the fact that Finland lives and flourishes only thanks to the USSR should be our trump card in diplomacy as well. And our propaganda should be built on this.
    It is time to organize a ministry of propaganda and bring historical facts to our people from our point of view, and not to refute someone's nonsense.
    1. RUSS
      RUSS 7 December 2017 16: 44
      +5
      Quote: glory1974
      the fact that Finland lives and prospers only thanks to the USSR should be our trump card in diplomacy as well. And our propaganda should be built on this.

      What kind of fact is this? You invented? You write that Finland lives and thrives thanks to the USSR, but the Union has not existed for a quarter of a century, and the Finns are all thriving laughing
      1. Curious
        Curious 7 December 2017 17: 45
        +2
        They have accumulated a lot of stocks. As everyone eats and drinks, decline begins.
      2. Okolotochny
        Okolotochny 8 December 2017 00: 25
        +5
        You look at the reaction of the Finns to retaliatory sanctions. Of all Europe, the most acute reaction was.
      3. Glory1974
        Glory1974 8 December 2017 10: 41
        0
        You write that Finland lives and flourishes thanks to the USSR, but the Union has not existed for a quarter of a century, and the Finns are all flourishing

        There is no USSR, but there is Russia. In this regard, Finland even won, because not only orders for industry, but also a tourist cluster and related trade began to develop rapidly.
        What kind of fact is this? You invented?

        The fact is known to the Finns themselves and those who are interested in this, or at least have been to Finland. Not to notice that half of Finland lives at the expense of Russians is not possible.
        In Europe, this fact is carefully kept silent, because it brings down all their Russophobia.
        1. RUSS
          RUSS 8 December 2017 14: 04
          +1
          Quote: glory1974
          There is no USSR, but there is Russia. In this regard, Finland even won, because not only orders for industry, but also a tourist cluster and related trade began to develop rapidly.

          Bullshit, how did the Finns win from the collapse of the USSR if our economy was in a tailspin in the 90s?
          1991-1993 Finland experienced the deepest recession in the history of the country. Its main reason was the termination of trade relations with the USSR after its collapse.
          The termination of trade relations with the USSR forced Finland to take measures to restructure the industry due to the inability to send goods previously exported to the USSR to other countries. According to the model developed by the authors of the study, this caused an increase in production costs and a rise in the cost of goods by 13,3% in sectors not related to foreign trade (non-tradable sector) and exports to the USSR (non-Soviet sector). The termination of trade relations with the USSR in many respects caused the weakening of the real sector as a whole, after which the currency and credit crisis came.
          1. Glory1974
            Glory1974 8 December 2017 14: 14
            0
            1991-1993 Finland experienced the deepest recession in the history of the country. Its main reason was the termination of trade relations with the USSR after its collapse.

            I do not argue about this. At this time, when previously established economic ties were torn, it could not be otherwise.
            Survived? In full. And along with the orders, tourists appeared.
            but the tourist cluster and related trade began to develop rapidly.


            In general, the meaning of my comment came down to the fact that formally remaining in the western camp, Finland actively worked with the USSR, which brought it success. It was beneficial not only to Finland, but also to us. Both economically and militarily.
            1. RUSS
              RUSS 8 December 2017 14: 53
              +1
              Quote: glory1974
              . And along with the orders there were tourists.

              The share of tourism in Finland's GDP is 8,8%, you want to say that Finland develops and builds its economy on tourism alone?
              1. Glory1974
                Glory1974 8 December 2017 15: 06
                0
                Well, you yourself answered the question, what is the share of tourism in Finland's GDP.
                And where did I argue that on tourism alone?
                And about
                along with orders
                you modestly kept silent or didn’t notice?
                What do you want to prove to me I do not understand?
                What is very bad for Finland from cooperation with Russia?
                1. The comment was deleted.
  12. Gopnik
    Gopnik 7 December 2017 16: 28
    +1
    I do not quite understand what does not suit you. Instead of specifics from you only vague hints and dots. There was a single state, ruled by the grand duke, at least with Vladimir. Actually, Vladimir was considered the ancestor of the princes of the Rurikovich - all the princes were his descendants. Then yes, there was a “testament of Yaroslav, there was a congress in Lyubec,” a single power split into independent lands with its dynasties. But, at the same time, there remained a sense of community and origin, and (or rather, therefore) the throne of Kiev was the common property, for which the princes continued to fight, there was no separate Kiev dynasty. Those. the most decentralized, but "Russian land", "Rus" continued to exist. Perhaps in the end this connection would cease, and these separate “lands” would become separate states, but the Mongol invasion happened. As a result, part of the land was bluntly directly conquered by Poland, Lithuania, Hungary, having entered into their composition and having lost the dynasty with independence. And the rest, recognized, even formally, all this time the Grand Duke as the head, even complained about him to the Horde and claimed the throne, but in the end they were centralized back. And all this time, the descendant of Vladimir remained the head of state. Those. neither state nor dynastic continuity was interrupted.
    1. Curious
      Curious 7 December 2017 17: 43
      +2
      Well, you don’t understand that the whole process described by you is not the Russian state yet, that this is only the way to its creation - and God bless you. In the end, the functions of enlightenment are optional.
      1. Gopnik
        Gopnik 7 December 2017 18: 22
        +1
        Let's have less pathos, ok? There is something to say specifically - please, no - do not flood with a smart look. And you don’t have to do any favors; it’s not for you to enlighten me with meaningful sighs-oohs. Specifically, why is it NOT a Russian state, for what reason?
        1. Curious
          Curious 7 December 2017 19: 16
          0
          RUSSIAN STATE (Moscow state, Muscovy, Russian state, Russia), state. education con. 15 - beg. 18 centuries The capital is Moscow (until the 1710s), St. Petersburg [1714 (according to updated data; traditionally in the fatherland historiography - 1712) - 1721]. The ruling dynasties are Moscow. The Rurikovichs (before 1598), the Godunovs (1598–1605), the Shuiskys (from the Suzdal Rurikovich) (1606–10), the Romanovs (from 1613). The foundations of the Republic of Armenia were laid as a result of the strengthening of the Moscow Grand Duchy and the accession of the Novgorod Republic (1478).
          1. Gopnik
            Gopnik 7 December 2017 19: 34
            +1
            Congenial))) It is clear where you get the knowledge from. Well, since something is written on Wiki, then it is. The most authoritative source))) Please note that according to this light of knowledge, this state, like, ceased to exist in the beginning. 18th century. Will you say that it has nothing to do with the Russian Empire and there is no continuity?
            1. Curious
              Curious 7 December 2017 19: 46
              +1
              This is not a wiki. This is the Big Russian Encyclopedia, the publication of which is carried out according to the Decree of the President of the Russian Federation V.V. Putin under the scientific supervision of the Russian Academy of Sciences.
              If you are more competent in this matter, contact the RAS, they will rewrite this article.
              1. Gopnik
                Gopnik 7 December 2017 20: 13
                0
                Yes, I seem to be more competent, because I know that the Moscow Grand Duchy, in fact, did not exist, the Vladimir Grand Duchy existed, which the princes of the Moscow principality took no alternative to, making it their "homeland." And what about sir. 16th century, it is, in fact, "the Russian kingdom." And, of course, the Novgorod Republic was not annexed to the Moscow Grand Duchy. The Moscow prince (Grand Duke Vladimir) - "Sovereign" and so was her overlord, just tightened the nuts depriving them of independence and establishing direct rule.
                But this is all the lyrics. Most importantly, this “Russian state” is only a stage from the Great reign to the Empire in the continuous history of Russian statehood. Apache, in fact, was talking.
                1. Curious
                  Curious 7 December 2017 20: 53
                  0
                  I'm happy for you. The thing is small - to place your knowledge on the pages of some of the official Russian publications.
                  1. Gopnik
                    Gopnik 7 December 2017 20: 56
                    0
                    This knowledge has long been posted, and is not a secret. For example, I can recommend: Gorsky A, A. "Medieval Russia. What the sources say"
                    1. Curious
                      Curious 7 December 2017 22: 16
                      0
                      Thank. Let us turn to this source.
                      Anton Gorsky: Medieval Russia. What are the sources talking about?
                      Chapter 13
                      On the “unification processes” of the XIV – XV centuries
                      The era of the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries in Russian history is traditionally estimated as the period of the formation of a single state, as the time of the unification of Russian lands around Moscow. The Moscow state, which was called Russia from the end of the 1485th century, included eastern and western Russian territories, before the Batu invasions that made up the Suzdal, Novgorod, Murom, and partially Chernigov lands. The territory of the former Suzdal land fell completely under Moscow authority after the annexation of the Principality of Tver in 1471. Novgorod land was annexed in 1392, Murom - in 1521. By the end of the 1510th century, Ryazan land remained formally independent (it would become part of the Russian state only in 1360). ), as well as the Pskov land that stood out from the Novgorod XIV century (it will be annexed in XNUMX), but both were under the political control of Moscow. The territories are southern and western, those that in the pre-Mongol period were part of the Kiev, Chernihiv (partially), Pereyaslav (Pereyaslavl South), Smolensk, Volyn, Polotsk and Pinsk lands, were included in the Grand Duchy of Lithuania. This state arose in the XNUMXth century on the territory of ethnic Lithuania (Auxaitia and Zemaitiya) and soon began to annex Russian lands. By the beginning of the fourteenth century, the Polotsk and Pinsk lands bordering it directly were under Lithuanian rule, by the middle of the fourteenth century - Volyn, in the XNUMXs - Kiev, Pereyaslav and most of Chernigov lands, and in the beginning of the fifteenth century - Smolensk land. Thus, the Old Russian, East Slavic territories by the end of the XNUMXth century were divided between two large states - Moscow and Lithuania.
                      Do you think that the above information somehow contradicts that published in BDT?
                      1. Gopnik
                        Gopnik 7 December 2017 23: 35
                        0
                        There are no well-known facts. The main thing is that he then reveals in sufficient detail the political history of Russia, and does it even more in the book "From the lands to the great reigns: the" primitives "of the Russian princes of the second half of the 15th – 19th centuries." You can also recommend the book of his teacher V.A. Kuchkin "The Formation of the State Territory of North-Eastern Rus In the X – XIV BB." (also on the network) But the most important thing that Gorsky directly writes is that everything that was decentralized earlier was recognized (not even necessarily by its own will, but because the Horde considers it to be) the head of the Grand Duke of Vladimir, often simply formally and even fighting with him (as Novgorod), in the 1871th century it was centralized back. And what was not centralized was simply stupidly conquered by Lithuania and Poland. This is somewhat reminiscent of France at about the same time as Louis XI. Germany, under the name "Holy Roman Empire of the German Nation" could not be centralized, and did this only in the XNUMXth century, under the leadership of an alternative center and another dynasty. But, nevertheless, neither the Germans say that the history of Germany since XNUMX, nor the French do not believe that the French power began with Louis XI.
                      2. Gopnik
                        Gopnik 7 December 2017 23: 45
                        0
                        For example, here is what Gorsky writes about the “annexation” of Novgorod: “Novgorod land from the second half of the 1470th century recognized the political supremacy of the great princes of Vladimir (that is, in the 1471th century Moscow), but practically retained full independence, being essentially a boyar republic. In 1471-1477, part of the Novgorod nobility tended to go over to the sovereignty of the Grand Duke of Lithuania (aka King of Poland) Casimir IV. Ivan III defeated the Novgorodians in the summer of 1478; according to the peace treaty concluded, the Novgorod “units" retreated to the Grand Duke Voloka and Vologda, the rest of the agreement corresponded to “antiquity.” The liquidation of Novgorod independence occurred as a result of the campaign of the Grand Duke of the end of 1477 - beginning of 1471, which ended with the surrender of the Novgorod boyar government on the terms of Ivan III, demanding that Novgorod does not differ in position from other constituent parts of his state (“we want statehood in our homeland, Veliky Novgorod it’s the same as our state in the Nizov land in Moscow ”). The reason for the campaign was the refusal of the Novgorodians in May XNUMX to call the Grand Duke of Moscow not only “master”, but also “sovereign” (a term fixing, according to the concepts of that time, a large degree of dependence), to which the previous Novgorod embassy seemed to give its consent. The Moscow side considered (judging by the speech given in the Moscow annals of the speech of Ivan III to the Novgorod ambassadors during the conflict of XNUMX) the original belonging of Novgorod to the descendants of Rurik - first to the princes of Kiev, then (from Vsevolod the Big Nest) to Vladimir. But in fact, Novgorod was annexed by purely force. "
                        Those. Novgorod de jure recognized the suzerainty of the Grand Dukes, and when he bucked, they fastened a wick to him, stupidly depriving them of independence. Those. “accession” of Novgorod is simply putting it under the direct and unconditional control of the Grand Duke - the sovereign of all Russia, i.e. joining fully controlled lands. Moreover, up to the 17th century, inclusive, there was the concept of the "Novgorod state", along with the "Vladimir and Moscow state" of the Russian kingdom.
          2. Glory1974
            Glory1974 8 December 2017 10: 45
            0
            RUSSIAN STATE (Moscow state, Muscovy, Russian state, Russia), state. education con. 15 - beg. 18 centuries Moscow the capital

            In my opinion, you describe the creation of the state after a period of feudal fragmentation of the 12-15 centuries.
            And before that, what state was it?
  13. voyaka uh
    voyaka uh 7 December 2017 17: 37
    +7
    Whatever you were in history, but the Finns managed to create,
    protect and develop a great modern state.
    With developed economies and democratic rule.
    An example for all neighbors and non-neighbors.
    With what I congratulate them! good
  14. bandabas
    bandabas 7 December 2017 17: 38
    +2
    Who just did not spread rot in the "prison of nations." And Finns, and Tatars, and Chinese and other Chechens. Everyone except the Russians. Ah, everyone is learning Russian. Because, come in handy.
  15. panzerfaust
    panzerfaust 7 December 2017 18: 07
    +4
    The Finns defended their independence. And in 1940 and in 1945, they did not let the Red Army into their territory. But Mannerheim did well, he taught us a good lesson that you should not underestimate the enemy.
    1. Gopnik
      Gopnik 7 December 2017 18: 24
      +4
      Quote: panzerfaust
      And in 1940 and in 1945, they did not let the Red Army into their territory.


      Forgot to add, "within current borders." That is, greatly simplifying where the Red Army didn’t reach, they didn’t let it go, but where it reached it ceased to be “their territory”.
    2. RUSS
      RUSS 7 December 2017 18: 47
      +3
      Quote: panzerfaust
      The Finns defended their independence. And in 1940 and in 1945, they did not let the Red Army into their territory. But Mannerheim did well, he taught us a good lesson that you should not underestimate the enemy.

      Forgot to add
      I would add the civil war in Finland in 1918, if the Red Finns defeated then I think the Red Army would enter Finland "at the request" of the left government and everything would work out like with the Baltic in the 39th .....
  16. Monarchist
    Monarchist 7 December 2017 19: 07
    +2
    Quote: Curious
    I join !!! How would you like articles on the VO to reflect modern knowledge in many areas of the current state of scientific disciplines, rather than sacred mythological utopias, Scientology visions of fans of the Dancing Spirit cult mixed with the teachings of Daniil Andreev.

    I am not interested in seintology, I’m utopian on the drum, and AUTHENTICITY in INFORMATION is necessary
  17. Monarchist
    Monarchist 7 December 2017 19: 11
    +1
    Quote: panzerfaust
    The Finns defended their independence. And in 1940 and in 1945, they did not let the Red Army into their territory. But Mannerheim did well, he taught us a good lesson that you should not underestimate the enemy.

    Underestimating the enemy is always BAD. Better rebounds ** than nedobz ****
  18. Monarchist
    Monarchist 7 December 2017 19: 25
    +2
    "Russia is the prison of the peoples" it is necessary to invent such a thing, and then who will be the model? Incidentally, in the "prison of nations" the bad king took care not to offend the religious feelings of others. As an example: before the 1917 revolution, each recruit swore an oath according to the customs of his ancestors. Oleinikov and Samsonov should have such facts, and I know this from Ignatiev’s book “Fifty Years in Service.”
    I doubt that in what other state the religious traditions of small nations were observed so much, but with the St. George Cross, the respected author will confirm that in RI the St. George Cross is for Christians and non-Christians. THERE WAS NO ONE
    1. Curious
      Curious 7 December 2017 19: 56
      0
      "... the rookie swore allegiance to the customs of his ancestors." Not according to the customs of the ancestors, but in the presence of a clergyman of his religion.
      For Muslims it was allowed to use the Pre-Kagay-Tatar dialect, Turkish, Persian dialect, Aderbijan-Turkic dialect.
  19. midshipman
    midshipman 7 December 2017 19: 52
    +4
    Dear readers, today is December 7th.
    But on December 7, 1941, on the orders of the commander of the Karelian Front (the division defended the canal), the first platinum of the White Sea-Baltic Canal was blown up. The frost was -37 degrees. Two thousand German-Finnish warriors of the tank battalion (fascists) were washed away to Lake Onega. Fighting after that on the Karelian front ceased until 1944. The Karelian front after this battle near Povenets became the most stable front of the Second World War.
    If you wish, read the article in "VO" "Order to stop the enemy by platinum explosion." I have the honor.
    1. voyaka uh
      voyaka uh 8 December 2017 02: 36
      +2
      Read. About 2 thousand washed away warriors of the tank battalion there is not a word. By the way, where did the tank battalion come from in the distant part of Karelia if they had only three dozen tanks, and Soviet trophies?
      And how could water rush into frost minus 37 degrees? She would freeze right away.
      But the fact that on December 6, 1941 England declared war on Finland and ultimately demanded that it cease hostilities against the USSR is true. The Finns stopped.
  20. Ivan Tartugai
    Ivan Tartugai 7 December 2017 20: 42
    0
    Quote from the article:
    Thus, Finland became an independent state. At the same time, Finland was immediately made an “anti-Russian ram.”

    Offer- "Thus, Finland has become an independent state. "should write:" Thus, Finland done The "independent" state. "The West made Finland" independent "using the then weakness of the Soviet government. As an" independent "state, vassal Finland could serve and served as a bridgehead against the USSR-Russia. From the Finnish bridgehead the Soviet Union, the population of the USSR received a lot of evil.
    1. RUSS
      RUSS 7 December 2017 21: 15
      +1
      Quote: Ivan Tartugay
      West made Finland “independent” by

      West? Please specify.
  21. Curious
    Curious 8 December 2017 00: 40
    0
    Gopnik,
    It is possible to elaborate on the issue under discussion for a long time, but neither Tatishchev, nor Karamzin, nor Presnyakov, nor Cherepnin, Kuchkin, Gorsky, etc. etc. we will not find another interpretation of the thesis with which the discussion began.
    1. Gopnik
      Gopnik 8 December 2017 01: 22
      +2
      Of course we will not find. They begin the history of the Russian state with Vladimir Krasno Solnyshko and lead it through the stages of decentralization, centralization, but continuously and consistently up to the present.
      1. Curious
        Curious 8 December 2017 02: 50
        0
        Absolutely correct.
        “We believe that the so-called Kievan Rus, that is, the initial period of Russian history (IX – early XIII centuries), did not give our country statehood. During this time, it has come a long way from military democracy to chiefdom, and then to city communes "Volosts-lands. None of these stages of political genesis can be connected with the state. At the same time, Kievan Rus gave our history a communal tradition that formed the basis of the Zemstvo tradition, which constituted a kind of alternative to the all-consuming state in the future."
        A. Yu. Dvornichenko. "Ontology of Russian statehood."
        1. Gopnik
          Gopnik 8 December 2017 11: 26
          0
          Dvornichenko has no authority even once, as a tstorik of the Middle Ages, he is not quoted. He simply sets out, as he understands, the concept of his teacher Froyanov (whom he later betrayed as a true crest) with “city-states” choosing princes at his discretion. Dvornichenko is generally a “specialist” in the history of Ukraine of a later time.
          Russia (“Kievan Rus”, as we know, was not a book term of the 19th century) is a classic early medieval state, with weak (compared to New time) state institutes, but, nevertheless, one ruler (at some point even if formal), a single dynasty (the concept of Russia as the common property of the "house of the Rurikovich"), a single Church, a single political and cultural space.
          1. Curious
            Curious 8 December 2017 12: 18
            0
            The fact is that, to prove your point of view, you did not mention other "authorities" other than yourself. Nevertheless, the scientists mentioned by me and you, as one speak of the very opposite. Therefore, I do not want to offend you in any way, but Dvornichenko and Froyanov are authorities in the area under discussion, unlike you. Maybe you are an authority in some other area, but not in the ontology of Russian statehood for sure. Therefore, for my part, I draw a line. since further discussion of the topic will already be a tautology. I believe that everyone has sufficiently stated his point of view. All the best.
            1. Gopnik
              Gopnik 8 December 2017 12: 58
              0
              I mentioned Gorsky. And he does not claim the absence of a Russian power until the 15th century, as you do. Actually, here are quotes from it: “Another thing is the era of the so-called Old Russian state. In this period, at the end of the X - the beginning of the XII century, there were two concepts denoting political entities. These are lands and volosts ...
              Independent states were called "lands" in Russia. In the sources we meet "Greek land" (Byzantium), "Bulgarian land" (Danube Bulgaria), "Ugric land" (Hungary), "Lyad land" (Poland), etc. Accordingly, in Russia in the XI - beginning of the XII century there was only one land - "Russian land"; that was the name of the state, the country as a whole. The term "Russian land" was used to designate it along with the name "Rus", which denoted both the people and the country "Volosts" were also called in the sources of the XI - beginning of the XII century the constituent parts of the state "Rus" / "Russian land" ".
              "In the XII century, Russia enters the stage of political development ... The most noticeable change was that the term" land "with a territorial definition began to apply not only to Russia as a whole (" Russian land "), but also to individual regions of Russia: large “Volosts” begin to be called “lands” ... From a dynastic point of view, Kiev and Novgorod lands had a different status. The Kiev table nominally continued to be considered the “oldest”, and Kiev the capital of all Russia ... As a result, the princes of the strongest branches and accordingly, the strongest lands considered themselves entitled to claim Kiev reign and fought for it fiercely. At the same time, Kiev land became an object of collective ownership: representatives of the strongest branches also had the right to claim "part" (ownership of part of the territory) within it " .
              And here is the hairpin addressed to Froyanov and Dvornichenko who joined him: "In historiography there is a whole direction whose representatives believe that the" volosts "were some" city-states "," state-communities ", where the people ruled all affairs, and the princes were only invited officials. Information from sources on the volosts of the XNUMXth – early XNUMXth centuries completely contradicts this concept. The volost appears in them only as a princely possession. During this period, we will not find definitions of volosts by city, but find Novgorod volosts "," Pereyaslav volost "," Smolensk volost ", etc. Volosts are determined exclusively by the prince-owners".
              That is, there was, even despite fragmentation at some point, a single country "Rus", "Russian Land", with its capital in Kiev, where the strongest prince sat. Although he could have been sent away by smaller princes
            2. Gopnik
              Gopnik 8 December 2017 12: 59
              0
              Quote: Curious
              Therefore, for my part, I draw a line. since further discussion of the topic will already be a tautology. I believe that everyone has sufficiently stated his point of view.


              Yeah, better stop running in circles without any confirmation.

              Quote: Curious
              All the best


              Mutually.
  22. Romin
    Romin 8 December 2017 01: 39
    +1
    For example, the German and Swedish colonization in Eastern and Northern Europe was reduced to ...... The surrounding population was forcibly turned into serfs - in fact, into slaves, "two-legged weapons" .... What about the absence of Serfdom in Russia Empire ?? Author open 5th grade history book! After these words, the article is worthless;))).
    It is better to make serfs from the conquered peoples.
    In the Russian Empire, serfs were mostly Russians, Belarusians and Ukrainians, i.e. State-forming nations of the Republic of Ingushetia. And this is just a SHAME! This is a form of "slavery." They made their own slaves!
    1. Glory1974
      Glory1974 8 December 2017 10: 51
      0
      This is a form of "slavery." They made their own slaves!

      If you think in this vein, then now all the workers are in slavery.
  23. Dimmih
    Dimmih 8 December 2017 04: 43
    +2
    Quote: venaya
    Quote: Dimmih
    What kind of passion do you write, native Russian for native Finns, Russian autochthons in Finland ..

    What are you writing about, what else "indigenous finns"in the XNUMXth century? The term" Finland "itself does not originate from the Karelian-Finnish language, but has a purely Russian-language origin. We recall the etymology of such names as Vienna, Venice, the provinces of Italy Venetto and France Vendée, where until now Venets live. Yes, and in the Finnish language, our modern term is Russia, the Russian Federation, etc. It is written as "Russia", where does my own nickname" venaya "come from, with Russian and Russian speakers = venäläinen и venäjänkielinen. The same thing in modern Estonian Russia = Russia. As far as I understand, you are not familiar with this topic or it is simply not interesting to you. By the way, Russian tribes lived in those places for a long time, for example, in the center of St. Petersburg they unearthed an ancient settlement as old as 7 thousand years old, in shape reminiscent of "Fort Ros" in the once Russian America. And the fact that countless traces of the most ancient forms were discovered there, such as stony writing (the Lake Ladoga region), drawings, and huge megalith constructions. Just take an interest in this topic, now a lot of interesting and entertaining information is already available. And you are all some private surnames, it resembles a form of explicit zombies, but this phenomenon should be fought, it’s time already. So the very term “Finns” and “Finland” are directly related to the Russian language and have no connection with the Finno-Ugric languages ​​themselves. And the term "Finland" is simply a common distortion of the terms "Wen"land ", that is, the country of Venets, so often used to be called Russ for some time, and the" Varyazhskoe Sea "(now, recently, the Baltic) also had the name Venetian Gulf, since Venets lived for a long time there. Scandinavia is distorted "sve" and now "svens" (svens, or Swedes). Take an interest in all of this, unless of course it is personally interesting to you personally. So the root ones there are essentially venets and not in the newspeak "finns" who are under this name appeared no earlier than the 1917th century, for a country like Finland only appeared in XNUMX and it never existed before.

    Oh, woe, woe! Is there a decline in the Russian school? What are the Russian tribes 7 thousand years ago? What is it about? Although, from the lack of education, one can believe even in the Russian Vedas, at least something else. This is more likely not Fomenkovism, but Zadornovschina (rest in peace for him) and all this game about the ancient Slavic empires and domestic mammoths is no better than the fables about the ancient ukrov digging the Black Sea and erasing it.
    1. Dimmih
      Dimmih 8 December 2017 05: 13
      +3
      Quote: Dimmih
      By the way, Russian tribes lived in those places for a long time, for example, in the center of St. Petersburg, they excavated an ancient settlement of 7 thousand years old,

      Do not share how you determined the "Russianness" of these tribes? Did you find the Sanskrit inscription "Tverdislav was here"? I would not be so horrified if the term "Slavs" were used, the territory of their settlement in Europe was much larger than now, and the Germans and possibly the Celts lived mixed with them. But to record everyone in a row in the Slavs, and even more so in Russian, is wild game. Right Ren-TV of the brain ....
    2. Glory1974
      Glory1974 8 December 2017 10: 55
      0
      By the way, Russian tribes lived in those places for a long time, for example, in the center of St. Petersburg they unearthed an ancient settlement with an age of 7 thousands of years old, in shape reminiscent of "Fort Ros" in the once Russian America. And the fact that there were found countless traces of the most ancient forms of both fossilized writing (Lake Ladoga region), drawings, and huge megalith constructions.

      It does not say that these were Russian tribes. As I understood from the text, these are possible ancestors of the Russians.
      And in the Finnish language, our modern term is Russia, the Russian Federation, etc. it is written as "Venäjä", from where comes my own nickname "venaya", while the Russians and Russian speakers have = venäläinen and venäjänkielinen. The same thing in modern Estonian Russia = Venemaa.

      But according to this statement there is something to argue?
      1. Dimmih
        Dimmih 9 December 2017 07: 17
        0
        Easy! We open Wikipedia and read the article "Finns"! There below, in the article, even genetic studies are given. Pay special attention to genetic research! Of course, you can consider Vicki to be corrupt you know who imperialism is, but if you turn the Internet, then in some places this is confirmed. And so, in fact, Lucifer himself will not understand why anyone was called and how. Again, the self-name of Armenians-hai or gai, the inhabitants of Germany are Germans for us, they themselves do not call themselves that. There are still some thoughts, I’ll pick up and add a daughter from school.
      2. Dimmih
        Dimmih 9 December 2017 08: 17
        0
        Further, I propose to follow the "Rule of the Indians", according to which a stone should be called a stone, and a toad. Literally: By the way, the Russian tribes lived in those places for a long time, for example, in the center of St. Petersburg, they excavated an ancient settlement as old as 7 thousand years old. This statement does not imply a broad interpretation, it is said "Russian tribes." Have the courage to notice this. The Finns, by the way, in Russia were called a miracle, a family, etc., by the name of their tribes. Then, I quote: And the fact that there are found countless traces of ancient forms as a stony writing. And what is written there, what alphabet, photo in the studio. Who translated the "inscription", google translator? In the 30s, a tooth of a giant fossil monkey was found in North America, which the Nazis immediately declared the ancestor of the Aryan race. They say everything from ordinary monkeys, and we from this one, which is not like the others. It soon became clear that this tooth belonged to a giant fossil pig. T.O. the ancestral race of the lords was a giant fossil pig. I propose to adhere to a reasonable path and historicity and not to record all significant findings in a row exclusively in the tracks of the Slavs. Keep in mind that the population of Eurasia at that time, 7t. years ago was small and if we accept the point of view of the Zadornovites, then some Slavs everywhere inherited. And two thousand years to the Russian people or 22 does not matter. It matters what we have achieved during this time. And the less years we are, the more glorious our achievements!))))
  24. bagel
    bagel 15 February 2018 00: 09
    0
    Such a normal "ravings" am
    "After all, people did not know that the symbols of the then Finland were the Finnish swastika"
    Swastika in Finland since 18 years.

    Flag of the President of Finland:


    Finland Aviation Flag: