Military Review

The myth of the "Ukrainian people"

64
The myth of the "Ukrainian people"

The main prerequisite for the current catastrophe in Ukraine is the creation of a myth about the “Ukrainian people”. "Ukrainians" allegedly live on the territory of present-day Ukraine since ancient times and finally separated from the "Eastern Slavs" in the XIV-XVI centuries.


Contrary to historical data that indicate the fact that Russians (Russians, dews, Rusichs, Rusyns) have lived in the territory of modern Ukraine, Belarus and Russia since ancient times, in Russia they still stubbornly cling to this artificial theory. With strange zeal, they support the myth of the “birth of the Ukrainian ethnic group” in the Commonwealth. Although it is obvious that if in the V-XIII centuries. In the territory of modern Ukraine, Russes lived, then the "Ukrainians" can not arise in the next few centuries of the Lithuanian-Polish occupation. During this period, part of the Russians renounced the previous faith, language, but became not "Ukrainians", but Poles.

Historical sources of the 9th-13th centuries they don’t know any “Ukrainians-ukrov”. During the Polish-Lithuanian occupation, the Russian people were not exterminated and still inhabited their indigenous lands. Moreover, the Grand Duchy of Lithuania and Russia was in the initial period more Russian than Lithuanian. Two-thirds of it consisted of Russian lands. Russian was the state language, documents were published on it and legal proceedings were conducted. Only at a later time in the Grand Duchy did Catholicism prevail, and "Lithuania" underwent polonization. We do not observe any “ancient ukrov” in the Grand Duchy of Lithuania and Russian. Russian and Baltic tribes lived there, having a significant admixture of the Slavs of Central Europe, who retreated to the Baltic under the onslaught of the Vatican and German knights. In addition, many Slavs (Wends - Wends) have lived in the Baltic States since ancient times. Unfortunately, the history of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania and Russian in modern Russia is practically unknown and not studied, considering it a stranger. Although it can rightfully be attributed to part of Russian civilization, Russian history. Later, the Grand Duchy of Lithuania underwent Westernization (Westernization), was absorbed by Poland. But most of its land was eventually returned to Russia-Russia.

The seal of Galician-Volyn prince Yury Lvovich (about 1252 (or 1262) - 1308 (or 1316)) has reached our days, it was sometimes called George. The inscription on it reads: "The seal of the sovereign George, the king of Russia." When it was minted money - "Russian coin", "Russian pennies". They were minted before the 1434 year. The sons of Yuri Lvovich —Andrey and Lev Yuryevich — in the charter of 9 of August 1316, call themselves "by the grace of God the princes of all Russian land, Galicia and Vladimiria."

Galician-Volyn prince Yuri II Boleslav (1308 — 1340) in Latin writing (1335) to the master of the German Order Dietrich calls himself “God's grace the born-in-ruler of the whole of Little Russia”. The Polish king Casimir III the Great, having seized the Galicia-Volyn principality, sent Bishop Antony to Constantinople in 1370 on his own behalf and "from all princes and boyars of the Russians." In his letter he proposes to ordain Anthony so that “the law of Russia does not disappear ...”. The Polish ruler calls himself in this message: “the king of Liachia and Little Russia”. No "Ukraine" and "Ukrainian people." The term “Small Russia” itself came from the Byzantine Empire, the so-called Russian lands, which were conquered by Lithuania and Poland.

There were no special changes in this issue either in the XV or in the XVI century. As before, Russians lived in Little Russia. Nobody knew anything about “Ukrainians”. In the second half of the 16th century, Polish Jesuits, drawing up plans for the dissemination of the union among Russians, noted that they would be greatly helped by meetings with “Russian masters” and that it was necessary to take “Russian schools” into their hands and review all “Russian books”.

The fact that a large number of subjects of the Polish king were Russian by faith and Orthodox were by faith, and the Russian state with its capital in Moscow strengthened near the borders of the Commonwealth of the Russian Federation, could not but be disturbed by the Polish elite. The Polish elite could not create a single Slavic empire that could become the leading power in Europe, although there was potential for it. The Polish leadership did not want to take the path of equal treatment of all residents of the Commonwealth. Lyahi took the path of colonization, religious, national and economic oppression of the Russian population. Poland could assimilate the Russian population, but this required time, which the Polish elite no longer had.

The Poles tried to oppose the Russians of Little Russia with the Russians of the rest of Russia. Already at the end of the XVI century, one can find the origins of that ideology, which eventually gave rise to the modern “Ukrainian chimera”, ready to kill brothers, considering themselves “true Slavs”, and Russians from Russia “subhumans”. In Poland, they began to call Russians from Moscow Russia (Great Russia) "Muscovites." The Russians began to divide into two ethnic groups: Russians in the lands of the Commonwealth and "Muscovites, Muscovites" ("Muscovites") in Russia.

The Russians in Rzecz Pospolita were wanted to be turned into a sort of “janissary” - the selected Turkish corps, where Slavic, Circassian, Greek, Albanian children were gathered and brought up by professional killers, completely cut off from their national roots, ready to kill their relatives, compatriots, countrymen by the will of the Sultan. However, not enough time. This project could be fully realized only in the XX century.

In modern Ukraine, we see the finished product of this ideology. Slavic guys, Russ go to kill "terrorists", "separatists", "moskaley", in fact, those Russians who still remember their origin. The West was able to get their hands on new cannon fodder in the eternal war against Russia - “ukrov-Ukrainians”. Moreover, this cannon fodder of good quality is ethnic Russians, many generations of whom were warriors.

If we turn to the Russian, Byzantine and Horde sources of the 14th - 15th centuries, we will see that there are no “Muscovites” in Great Russia. How Russians lived on Russian lands, so they lived. As occupied by Poles and Lithuanians, and vassal in relation to the Horde, Russia was inhabited by Russian people, not "Muscovites" and "Ukrainians." Russian people in different lands attributed themselves to one people. The absence of difference was natural: it was about one people, one country, part of which was temporarily occupied.

To assert that in the XIV - XVI centuries. “Ukrainians” appeared in southwestern Russia, and “Great Russians” appeared in northeastern Russia, erroneously. This indicates a complete disregard for the historical sources of this era and a conscious deception or illiteracy. The dissected superethnos of the Russes then not only preserved the spiritual, cultural and national unity, but also had all the prerequisites for the elimination of foreign domination and the reunification of the people in a single state. It was the XVI century that gives us excellent examples of active resistance to religious and national oppression and the active self-organization of Russians in the occupied territory. The Zaporizhzhya Cossacks, which for some reason were recorded in “Ukrainian proto-state formation,” was an example of Russian self-organization and resistance to Polish and Ottoman-Crimean pressure.

Only active resistance and self-organization allowed the Russian people to join the armed struggle against the Polish invaders and begin the liberation of the Russian lands. The uprising of Bogdan Khmelnitsky was a real Russian national liberation war. It is necessary to reject the lies about the "national liberation struggle of the Ukrainian people under B. Khmelnitsky and the" reunification of the fraternal peoples of Russia and Ukraine. Russians fought against the Polish occupation and Russian (Moscow) regiments came to their aid. Two parts of Russia were reunited, not “Ukraine” and Russia. For six years, heroic fights with Pansky Poland were not mythical "Ukrainians", but Russians. Not “Ukrainians”, but Russians fought for their will, faith, the right to save themselves, not to be Polish “claps”.

This was well known to the participants of historical events themselves. In the summer of 1648, moving to Lviv, hetman Bogdan Khmelnitsky sent a wagon to the residents of the city: “I come to you as the liberator of the Russian people; I come to the capital city of the land of the Chervono-Russian to save you from Lyashsky (Polish) captivity ”. During the Pereyaslav Rada, the hetman noted that our persecutors and enemies want to "eradicate the church of God, so that the name Rusko may not be remembered in our land." About the war with the Russians testified from another camp. The Polish hetman Sapieha noted: “Not a gang of autocrats against us, but the great power of the whole Russia. All the Russian people from the villages, villages, towns and cities, bound by faith and blood with the Cossacks, threaten to uproot the gentry tribe and tear down the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth ”.

Thus, it was not a struggle for an “independent Ukraine”, but for the reunification of the divided Russian people, the two parts of united Russia. Yes, the later betrayals of the hetmans (after the death of Bogdan Khmelnitsky) were not connected with the national question, where the “Ukrainians” did not want to obey the “Muscovites”, but the elite ambitions of individuals and small groups. Part of the Cossack officers wanted to maintain greater independence in order to be able to get more profit from the subordinate territory, to maintain their elite status, and therefore led a "flexible policy" in relation to Moscow, Warsaw and Istanbul.

As for the term “Ukraine” (“outskirts”), it was used in sources to denote the most diverse territories, and it has no relation to the later “Ukrainians”. There were many such “Ukrainian borderlands” throughout Russia. It should be noted that Polish sources, especially early ones, also meant “border areas” by “Ukraine”. In particular, the Polish king Stefan Batory wrote in his station wagons: “To elders, elders, emperors, princes, sisters and knights, in Ukraine, Russian, Kiev, Volyn, Podolsk and Bratslav living” or “to everyone in general and individually from our Ukrainian elders ".

Do not be worth to indulge opponents of the unity of the Russian people and the Russian world. The erosion of the term “Russian”, “Rus” with various newly thought-out words like “Ukrainian”, “Maloros”, “Russian” is a concession to our external and internal enemies. It is impossible to concede to external enemies who are striving to split the Russian people, push their parts together, and absorb the debris of the Russian civilization. It is impossible to help the "fifth column" and regional separatists who are ready to literally invent any people on their knees, like "Siberians", "Pomors" and "Ukrainians". These people are ready to do anything to create their own "independent" banana republic and to cut the subordinate population.

It is necessary to clearly understand the fact that the myth of the "fraternal Russian and Ukrainian peoples" is tailored from historical fakes and insolent lies. This myth in the years of the existence of the Ukrainian SSR and the “independent” Ukraine (which has now become a semi-colony of the West) has taken so deep roots that now many people cannot understand what is happening in the “brotherly country”. This myth wanders from book to book, dominates the media, which makes it impossible to understand the essence of what is happening.

The bottom line is that tens of millions of Russians were trapped in a disastrous illusion, a mirage, a deceptive image. They were turned into "Ukrainians", people without a past, which is completely invented and mythologized and without a future. In the present war and blood. In the future, complete slavery, the role of consumables in the war with the rest of the Russian world.

Their fate is truly tragic. The tragedy is aggravated by the fact that they sincerely do not understand what is happening. They are Russians and at the same time “Ukrainians”. They are part of the rut super-ethnos, which, without asking for its consent, was turned into “Ukrainians” in the 20th century. Several generations of people who were born and raised in the USSR were brought up in the spirit of internationalism, in the spirit of "merging all nations into a single community - the Soviet people", they were brought up by "Ukrainians". Although they have not yet lost their Russian language, Russian culture, consciousness of unity with the rest of the Russian world.

They did not cease to be Russian in their anthropology, origin, language, but over the years of the existence of the Ukrainian SSR and "Ukraine" they to varying degrees - some more, others less - have lost their ethnic identity. Even those who do not consider themselves “Ukrainians” have become “Russian-speaking”, “Russian-speaking”. "Ukrainian Chimera" has become a reality. Rusy forgot who they are. And the enemies of the Russian civilization had an excellent opportunity to confront the Rus with the Rus in a fratricidal massacre. The enemy triumphs. You can make minimal efforts and get excellent results at the output. Chaos covers more and more Russian areas.

Those rusam who have kept themselves in this wraith will face a tough battle. They should become the centers of crystallization, the creation of Russian resistance. History repeats itself. Again, Little Russia is occupied. Russ on their land put in the position of strangers, rogue and slaves. The occupation power, which no longer conceals that its masters in the European Union and the USA, is waging a real war of extermination against the Russians. And it already leads by all methods - now not only in the spiritual, ideological, cultural, linguistic, informational, and socio-economic areas, but also at the power level. Against the Rus, the remnants of the army and the Interior Ministry, the security services, various neo-Nazi formations and foreign mercenaries were thrown. On the side of the Kiev gauleiters - Western intelligence agencies and various non-governmental organizations, all the power of the Western media.

War is rapidly gaining momentum. Already used heavy armored vehicles, artillery and aviation. The enemy by all means strive to dismember and swallow Little Russia. Turn it into an anti-Russian bridgehead. Under conditions of occupation, war and terror, the only means of upholding one’s right to survive and preserve one’s identity is national unity and resistance. For Russians who find themselves in such conditions, the rescue program is simple - quick rallying and fighting the occupiers, immediate reunification with the rest of Russia. All this was already the time of Bogdan Khmelnitsky. The demands of reunification by the Russians of Little Russia and the powerful information pressure of the Russians in Russia will force the Kremlin to take another step in the right direction.

Negotiations with the occupiers are meaningless. The West and the occupation administration are awaiting only complete surrender and slavish obedience. Ukraine in the plans of the owners of the West performs the role of an anti-Russian bridgehead, which should transfer chaos to the territory of Russia. In addition, Ukraine is a kind of trap for Russia. In the West, all the internal weaknesses of Russia are well-known: a sore spot of social justice, the presence of a powerful “fifth column”, where the main role is played by the oligarchy, the comprador bourgeoisie, the liberal wing of the “elite” and the near-power swamp, the Islamist and separatist underground. Involving Russia in a serious and protracted external conflict (partisan-type war) can become a fuse for an internal explosion. This is the scenario of the February 1917 revolution of the year. "Ukrainian trap" must be cut with a single blow, not allowing itself to engage in the games of the enemy.

To be continued ...
Author:
Articles from this series:
The myth of the "Ukrainian people"
The myth of the "Ukrainian people." Part of 2
Hetman - the favorite epoch "ukrov"
Hetman - favorite era "ukrov." Part of 2
On the reasons for the people's hatred of the Little Russian "gentry"
64 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. saag
    saag 30 May 2014 08: 14
    +4
    "The" Ukrainian trap "must be cut with one blow, not allowing yourself to be drawn into the enemy's games."

    I wonder how?
    1. Rostovchanin
      Rostovchanin 30 May 2014 09: 55
      +3
      I wonder how?

      I support ... tell this to the current "Great ukram"!
      1. Nicholas C.
        Nicholas C. 30 May 2014 11: 45
        +2
        Quote: Author Samsonov Alexander
        The Grand Duchy of Lithuania and Russia was in the initial period more Russian than Lithuanian. Two-thirds of it consisted of Russian lands.

        Alexander, do not complex. That Lithuania has nothing to do with today's Lithuania (in their old Lietuva). And it was not the Lithuanians who lived in it, but the Litvinians. Initially, there were no Lithuanian (Baltic) lands in Lithuania, and their area never reached one third of Lithuania.

        The founder of "Lithuania" Mindovg (pagan name) kept his capital in Novogrudok. And his lands were called "Black Russia". Neighbors - ethnic Balts - Yatvingians - he exterminated and exterminated. Although for this, even an agreement with the Order had to be concluded and presented to the Order of the oil and aukstayts that did not belong to Mindovg.

        It is customary for contemporary historians to call Lithuanian princes by lingual names, even if they are Orthodox saints like Dovmont-Timofey. Although the fact that all (or almost) generations of Russian Orthodox wives do not hide, they do not see the catch. However, no one has ever proved the hypothesis (invention) about the "Zhmud" origin of the Lithuanian princes. With this hypothesis, things are much worse than with the Norman (Rurik).
        1. washi
          washi 30 May 2014 15: 26
          +2
          Quote: Nikolai S.
          Contemporary historians

          I came across a book: "The true history of Ancient Russia" by Anton Belyakov.
          And Bushkov (not a historian, but an attentive listener and analyst), Zadornov (an aircraft engine builder, but having logical thinking, and not abstract like the "great" "historians" and "philosophers")
          Not at all historians, but believable (although historians cannot be trusted at all: they earn academic degrees in acting political reality on their own speculations)
          It is time in history (as SCIENCE) also obey logic, mathematics and economics.
          Our ancestors were not dumber.
          They received information more slowly.
        2. smile
          smile 30 May 2014 18: 08
          +1
          Nicholas C.
          You are fundamentally wrong. Such, if I may say so, the research of children like Bushkov (in his Russia, which did not exist) was intensively popularized mainly in Belarus. I hope it's clear why? These stuffing began in perestroika time simultaneously with the rise of the Great Ukr history and other "stories" on the shield ...
          The inhabitants of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania were called the Litvinians according to the geographical principle - in the same way as all the inhabitants of the USSR were called Russians.
          Of course, there was a squabble between the tribes that subsequently formed the Lithuanian nation, just as it had previously gone between the Slavic tribes. Therefore, the fate of the Yatvingians does not mean anything.

          The entire aristocratic elite of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania was originally absolutely XNUMX% Lithuanian, and only then was it diluted by the Russians.
          And their names have all been preserved in Lithuania. All these Mindaugas, Agirdas, Vytautas, Kjastases, as Lithuanians were called in the 13-14 century, are still called so. For example, can you imagine that the Russians, having captured, for example, Kazan, took and switched to Tatar names? So "Litvins" did not go over. Therefore, their names do testify. that initially the composition of their aristocracy was monolithic, and consisted of Lithuanians. Even this small fact does not leave a stone unturned from history.
          Lithuanians as a people formed around the Auksteyt. They still reprimand is considered the most correct. Zhamaytiytsy also survived, their dialect is more crude. But the difference is much smaller than between Russian and current Ukrainian.

          By the way, why prove the fiction about the Jamaican origin of the Lithuanian princes when no one believes that the Jamaicans are the source of the Lithuanian nobility, which was mainly supplied by the aukshtays?
    2. Spnsr
      Spnsr 30 May 2014 17: 08
      0
      I look to the west, and I am increasingly worried about the question: is the west a bad thing? who gave the concept to these two different definitions? and why are they so consonant? east - what ...? and the west is a zapadlo for the east ?!
    3. Viktor64
      Viktor64 3 June 2014 13: 47
      0
      Our warehouses are clogged with obsolete weapons, but given the level of equipment of the Ukrainian army, they will be enough. To transport tens of thousands of MANPADS, ATGMs, RPGs and many other weapons to the east of Ukraine that need to be disposed of. Tracing old weapons is almost impossible. Well, volunteers are always there. In a week, nothing will remain of the Ukrainian National Guard.
  2. andrey903
    andrey903 30 May 2014 08: 22
    0
    From Ukrainians the word went to steal
    1. smile
      smile 30 May 2014 11: 41
      +3
      andrey903
      Why be like Bandera propaganda, screaming that all evil is from the Russians? Do you understand that in this way you set up normal Ukrainians against yourself, including those who now defend the independence of Little Russia with arms in their hands?
      You remind me now of the Lithuanian secessionists, claiming with a blue eye that the Russian invaders have corrupted the virgin Lithuanian people, taught them how to drink vodka, steal and swear. If you do not wish. so that all other peoples hate you, such statements are unacceptable.
      1. Watson J.
        Watson J. 30 May 2014 13: 38
        +3
        And in my opinion, a funny joke. Before the Poles called this part of the territory of Ukrania, other verbs were used in the Russian language - the consequences of an unsuccessful experience of trading with ancient Etruscans (ethnic Russians - a typical Moscow saying) wink ) There were verbs - they scribbled and s3.14zdili, purely according to the geographical principle. (Tiber and Pisa). Etruscan fell out of history, it was necessary to replace it with something. In Khrushchev's times, clearly hinting at the "Ukrainian" origin of the secretary general, they used the verb "communizdili". By the way, both the Etruscans and Khrushchev became extinct. Not a good sign.

        When it’s useless for Banderlogs to explain something due to a breakdown in the transmissive and analytical functions of the brain, purely for the sake of relaxation, well, you just want to blame them with sarcasm. Anyway, the truth is, they don’t understand. Nothing.
        1. smile
          smile 30 May 2014 18: 13
          0
          Watson J.
          These are jokes to us. And now, when the national question has been aggravated in Ukraine to the utmost, Ukrainians are on the verge of joking, it seems to me that it’s impossible to do it — we will inflict a mortal insult — and then prove that you were joking and that you are not a great-power chauvinist.
        2. krpmlws
          krpmlws 2 June 2014 11: 17
          0
          Quote: Watson J.
          Etruscan fell out of history

          Quote: Watson J.
          Etruscan, and Khrushchev - died out

          Nobody died out, the people disappeared as a whole socio-cultural formation, but the descendants of the Etruscans must be supposed to live well now. In general, we must understand that there were not only Etruscans, but there was a Germanic tribe of Cherusians, apparently the Rus-root has an ancient Indo-European origin, therefore Etruscan , like Cherusks are not directly related to Russians and Slavs.
  3. Angro Magno
    Angro Magno 30 May 2014 08: 24
    +3
    Ukriy decided to self-identify in such a perverse way for one simple reason - they wanted to cut money on this easily. They even made a list of who owes them and how much; they did not even hesitate to include lemongrass there. This I call "Swipe".
    The trouble is that there will be no money - there will be no ancient ukrov, ancestors of Cro-Magnons.

    The naked economy of the Selyukov level. No geopolitics.
  4. chehywed
    chehywed 30 May 2014 08: 41
    +7
    Yes, this is a no brainer that the Russians, Ukrainians and Belarusians are not fraternal peoples, but ONE divided people.

    A brief excursion into the History of Russia and Europe, well, and not only for maydaunov of course.
  5. k1995
    k1995 30 May 2014 08: 59
    0
    Map of Russia 17 century, pay attention to the borders passing west of Kiev
    1. 120352
      120352 30 May 2014 11: 04
      0
      k1995
      The map, of course, is interesting, albeit small, but the main thing is that it is out of date at least twice. There is no change of borders in the Petrine era and the conquests of Catherine the Great in the Russian-Turkish war, when Novorossia additionally entered the Russian Empire.
    2. xtur
      xtur 30 May 2014 13: 58
      +1
      > Map of Russia 17th century, pay attention to the borders that run west of Kiev

      for the map of Russia of the 17th century, the alphabet is more than strange, as they did not write in the 17th century, it is modern spelling, Soviet. Even if the card is original, then all the inscriptions on the card are rewritten by someone. And according to what rules he copied the names, one should ask the one who copied.
    3. xtur
      xtur 30 May 2014 14: 04
      0
      > Map of Russia 17th century, pay attention to the borders that run west of Kiev

      All inscriptions on the map are given by modern spelling, which threw out several letters to them in the Russian alphabet, they did not write this in the 17th century. Even if the card is original, who copied its inscriptions according to the rules known only to him
  6. rotor
    rotor 30 May 2014 09: 05
    +1
    The term “Little Russia” itself came from the Byzantine Empire, the so-called Russian lands that were captured by Lithuania and Poland.


    Some "connoisseurs" of history should learn this!
  7. 120352
    120352 30 May 2014 09: 22
    +4
    Useful article. And for Russians, and for those who consider themselves Ukrainians, i.e. for the deceived Russians. Such information should be communicated to all residents of Russia, Ukraine, Europe, America. It is necessary to revise the content of history textbooks in this part.
    1. smile
      smile 30 May 2014 11: 45
      0
      120352
      Can I supplement? Not that much to change - in general, they write it right. You just need to focus on some points - to disavow the fantasies of compilers of textbooks of all kinds of independents, and not only Ukrainian ones.
  8. wot
    wot 30 May 2014 09: 29
    0
    yes there are many more in the history of dark spots and there are a lot of versions and the result of these versions is slaughter and blood
  9. b.sh.d.13
    b.sh.d.13 30 May 2014 09: 29
    +1
    The author of the article is right! History repeats itself, as it was already, for example, at the time of the baptism of Russia. Then, about 12 million people lived on the territory of Kievan Rus. And after Christianization, about 3 million remained, the rest were mostly killed, only young children and those who accepted Western teaching were left alive. So for a long time it was already necessary to think, we are needed by the West as subjects, puppets, slaves, and so that no more words would be said about the RUSSIANS!
    1. 120352
      120352 30 May 2014 11: 09
      +2
      b.sh.d.13
      The population in Kievan Rus was so drastically reduced not so much because of its Christianization, but because of its (population) destruction by the Horde. Then, on the site of Kievan Rus, the so-called Wild Field, where there was almost no population. But it was still Russia, not Ukraine. And now it is also Russia = Russia.
      1. Roshchin
        Roshchin 30 May 2014 12: 11
        +1
        The population of Kievan Rus was also exterminated due to civil strife, when the troops of one Orthodox prince received a blessing and went to war with another principality, ruthlessly burning the territory, selling them into slavery and exterminating the Orthodox. Sometimes in alliance with the themes of the same steppes. The Wild Field arose not so much because of the Horde, but because of internal strife and, as it were, the ambitions of the ruling elite, its venality and the desire for power at any cost.
        As we have in the 90s, when the population decline began and is still ongoing.
        1. mihailmpmailru
          mihailmpmailru 30 May 2014 23: 05
          +1
          There was no such state of Kievan Rus, an artificial concept
      2. mihailmpmailru
        mihailmpmailru 30 May 2014 23: 05
        0
        There was no such state of Kievan Rus, an artificial concept
        1. Natalya Myasnikova
          Natalya Myasnikova 12 October 2014 11: 24
          +1
          Rightly noticed. The term "Kievan Rus" appeared only in the 19th century with the light hand of some scribbler, I do not remember his surname, and this term was later consolidated by Karamzin in his "History of the Russian State". The direct purpose of the term "Kievan Rus" is to designate a certain time period in the history of the development of Rus. The term "Ancient Rus" is synonymous with the term "Kievan Rus". In the most ancient monuments of writing, for example, in the "Tale of Bygone Years" (or the Chronicle of Nestor) the concept "Kievan Rus" does not appear, there is simply "Rus" !!!
    2. smile
      smile 30 May 2014 12: 08
      +1
      b.sh.d.13
      Listen, well, funny, honestly. What are 12 million? Look when the population of Russia has reached 12 million. At the same time, look how much the territory has increased, how much the population density has increased. Well, you can’t be so .... naive, honestly ...
      You think about the numbers voiced by you. In all of Europe, by the 16th century, God forbid, if 70-80 million. And here you are claiming that the Orthodox have managed to destroy 9 million in such a small territory, more than the Nazis in Ukraine of the 20th century.
      Such figures are mainly thrown in by those who want to discredit Orthodoxy, as one of the pillars of our state. Vaughn and Pusi Riot support for the same purpose.
      No one is talking. that before Christianity we were savages - this is not true, we were developed more than many Europeans. But the measure should also be known.
      Of course, when determining who will dominate, Christians or pagans, blood was shed, but you should not hyperbolize it so much. In addition, it is worth considering that in the unification of various Russian tribes, Orthodoxy played a very important ideological role. And the princes made the decision to introduce Orthodoxy in our country, not because they suddenly believed - it strengthened the state.
    3. mihailmpmailru
      mihailmpmailru 30 May 2014 23: 05
      +1
      There was no such state of Kievan Rus, an artificial concept
  10. parusnik
    parusnik 30 May 2014 09: 34
    +2
    It is a pity, the author did not indicate how the rulers of Southeast Russia betrayed the interests of the people ... Poles, nationality was on the drum, the main thing is to be Catholic, if you accept Catholicism .. you have everything left, title, land .. and you can enter power ..and the Russian princes, whose lands fell under the power of Poland and Lithuania, went into Catholicism in orderly rows and columns ... And the same bastard, later in the 19th century, suddenly remembered that they were supposedly Ukrainians ... For shouting that I am a Polish patriot, at that time it was fraught .. And since I am not a Pole, but I am Ukrainian .. and of course, against the invaders ...
    1. b.sh.d.13
      b.sh.d.13 30 May 2014 10: 23
      0
      Well, the goal of the article is not about betrayal, but where and when the so-called Ukraine appeared. But betrayal was natural.
  11. rotor
    rotor 30 May 2014 09: 57
    0
    I must say that Polish sources, especially early ones, also meant border territories under “Ukraine”.


    So what the hell are we writing Polish Ukraine instead of Outskirts. I propose to rename Ukraine to the Outskirts!
  12. Gomunkul
    Gomunkul 30 May 2014 10: 05
    +3
    The Poles tried to oppose the Russians of Little Russia to the Russians of the rest of Russia.
    Here the problem is buried much deeper. It was not the Poles who tried to oppose the Russians of Little Russia to the rest of Russia, but the Vatican through the Poles (Catholicized) tried to expand its influence to the east, because. for the whole East, Catalism was a Gentile. It is worth recalling the main purpose of the Crusades. hi
  13. 19morozoff89
    19morozoff89 30 May 2014 10: 23
    0
    The Principality of Moscow was an enemy of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania Russian Zhemoytsky (full name), which grew from the Baltic Sea to the Crimean Khanate even before the formation of the Commonwealth. His whole story is the history of wars. More often fought with Moscow and the Tatars. The invasion of the crusaders at Grunwald crashed about us. And we were called litvins (analogous to the Russians, because the country was multinational). And this principality was the strongest in Eastern Europe ... Until the Poles were contacted. Only the oppression of the Orthodox part of the population caused a series of uprisings both in the territory of modern Ukraine and Belarus. Of course, this raised, so to speak, the rating of Moscow in the eyes of the gentry and ordinary people, but no talk of unification was conducted. It was NOT OCCUPATION. Taking advantage of the weakening of Rech, it was divided between three states: Hungary, Prussia and Russia (these three sections of Rech and WAS OCCUPATION). After the partition, the situation only worsened. The gentry (nobles) lost almost all their rights and liberties, because in Russia there was an absolute monarchy. And this oppression is also a series of uprisings, but already in the Russian Empire.
    So there is nothing to say that Russia is all such a holy protector of the weak and oppressed. All are good from all sides.
    1. smile
      smile 30 May 2014 12: 50
      +4
      19morozoff89
      1. By the time Grunwald happened, ON had already begun to crush Poland. Remember Krevsky Union? Jagello then pledged to translate Lithuania into the Latin alphabet, use all possible means to return the lands lost by Poland, convert to Catholicism and convert all his brothers, boyars, people to it, annex some Russian lands to the Kingdom of Poland ... etc.
      By the way, the Lithuanian gentry received rights similar to the Polish one - only three years after the battle of альalgiris. It is ridiculous to say that the German invasion crashed on the ON - but what about Poland, which dominated the ON? At all?
      2. By the 16th century, the entire gentry of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania was completely catholicized and completely polonized, even spoke mostly in Polish.
      3. Burning the Commonwealth back in the time of the Vase officially declared ALL Russian lands to belong to it, corresponding changes were made to the coat of arms. Independent Lithuania was no longer there. And since then, Poland has pursued an active predatory policy towards us. The population of Poland at that time was many times higher than ours, it was a powerful state. But as a result of our strengthening, we were able to undermine the power of this aggressive state. And since the Poles did not appease, they were divided up, the RUSSIAN lands with the RUSSIAN population that were previously seized by them were mainly taken from the aggressor - in the same way, Hitler’s Germany was divided.
      4. Your statements, made with a blue eye on the Russian invaders, are akin to the Germans (if they had sounded) that the evil Russian invaders invaded peaceful Germany within the summer of 1942 and vilely dismembered it.
      5. Well, and finally, about the rights of the gentry. This is not right - this is arbitrariness and the complete absence of any laws. Rights - did not exist in principle. By that time, there were no countries in Europe in which in one state it was possible to calmly kill and rob even peers, I’m not talking about burning a dozen neighboring villages along with the population - and there will be nothing for you. This was only in Japan in the 16th-early 17th century. The King will not help. Even if he wanted to - could not - the magnates limited the quartz army. And it can only help if you join another gentry gang. By the way, Shlyakhta officially sold the title of Polish king, arranging an actual auction.
      And the gentry revolted not only because she was deprived of the main right - the right to rokosh, the right to actual non-jurisdiction ... they rebelled because Russian slaves were taken from them. Look - all their uprisings - under the slogan - Poska from Mozha to Mozha. More specifically, Pilsudski - Polska from Helsinfors to Tifliss. Representatives of the "rebels" were ready to remain in the RI. but only if Russian slaves and Russian lands are returned to them. No wonder the population of Poland as a whole did not support the uprising. like fire, fearing the restoration of gentry arbitrariness.

      No one says that we are white and fluffy ... but against the backdrop of a gangster ultra-aggressive, truly gangster Polish state, we are indeed the apotheosis of humanism and justice.
      1. Nicholas C.
        Nicholas C. 30 May 2014 15: 05
        +1
        Quote: smile
        2. By the 16th century, the entire gentry of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania was completely catholicized and completely polonized, even spoke mostly in Polish.

        This is not true. By the 16th century, this is by 1500. This kind of change went massively later, AFTER the Union of Lublin, when the Litvin elite swallowed the annexation of the Litvin lands in the north of modern Ukraine (south immediately after Chigirin and Subbotov everything was part of the Crimean Khanate, Kremenchug - Tatar Kermenchuk, Podillya - Turkish). Then Poles FORBIDDEN the use of the Russian language (by the way, even before the Second World War, the Poles fined Galicians 5 zlotys for "dog language". Jesuits. Then Poles banned the Orthodox Church, there are only a few semi-legal bishops left, the Metropolitan (Grave) appeared only when he personally owed it to the Cossacks Vladislav). Then Poles deprived Orthodox political rights, incl. the right to sit in the Sejm and the Sejm. Apparently, the latter became the main reason for the mass catholicization of the Russian Litvin elite. And so there are enough examples of still Orthodox Litvin gentry of the 16th, beginning of the 17th century.
        dic.academic.ru/dic.nsf/enc_biography/97011/ Ostrog
        www.mgarsky-monastery.org/history/13
        During the Khmelnitsky uprising, Polish troops were commanded by the Poles-Litvins, whose fathers were still Orthodox.
        1. smile
          smile 30 May 2014 18: 26
          +2
          Nicholas C.
          Are you going to say that I am guilty that the events I mentioned took place during the 16th century, and not "by the 16th century", as I wrote? :)))
          Then you have to add that the process itself began much earlier and such trends started soon after the Krevsky Union. And this is more than a century before the onset of the 16th century.
          Of course, the Orthodox part of the Polish-Lithuanian gentry of Russian origin remained until the very end of the Polish state. But only very small. Pressure on Orthodoxy began already in the 14-15th century, and it could not help but begin as the dominant Polish aristocracy was catholicized. So, in my opinion, it’s not worth tying the emergence of a tendency to the adoption of any law.
          1. Nicholas C.
            Nicholas C. 30 May 2014 21: 13
            +1
            Quote: smile
            Are you going to say that I am guilty that the events I mentioned took place during the 16th century, and not "by the 16th century", as I wrote? :)))

            I do not argue, much less accuse, I just specify. In most cases we are like-minded people, this is just a reason to share knowledge. The West has always pressed. Even before the division of the churches into Orthodox and Catholic. The Kreva union - the beginning of the Jagellon dynasty and the personal obligations of Jagaila himself meant nothing for the Lithuanian elite and were ignored. Although Yagailo (and he even managed to be an Orthodox) as a neophyte “toiled” a lot with fire and sword to spread Catholicism. Certainly, the environment of Jagaila himself and his descendants became Catholics. Also, Daniel's maneuvers with the Pope for the sake of "financing" the anti-Mongol war meant nothing for the Galician elite, especially the church one. All the same, the West did not give money. Or he gave a penny, but demanded for a ruble. The churchmen did not even take part in the negotiations, they were then in the first roles in the all-Russian metropolis. Dad also gave Mindovg the title of Korodi instead of money and troops, but it’s not that the elite, Mindaugas himself, one might say, laughed. On the church line, something in the West began to work out only after the Union of Florence and the betrayal of Gregory Mamma in Constantinople and the Greek Isidore in Moscow. On the state line, genocide and ethnocide began only with European integration after the Union of Lublin. The union of Kreva, the common king - disgusting, of course, but then people still did not massively renounce their faith, language, or the Russian name.

            Quote: Grove
            Russians are Russians, Ukrainians are Ukrainians, Moldovans are Moldavians and nothing more.

            But the great philosopher Ivan Solonevich wrote to himself: "I am Russian. Of Belarusian men." But, apparently, he is forgivable - he did not possess Svidomitism and Jesuitism.
            1. smile
              smile 30 May 2014 22: 08
              +1
              Nicholas C.
              Accepted. I completely agree.
    2. Nicholas C.
      Nicholas C. 30 May 2014 15: 43
      +2
      Quote: 19morozoff89
      Hungary, Prussia and Russia (these three sections of Speech and WAS OCCUPATION). After the partition, the situation only worsened. The gentry (nobles) lost almost all their rights and liberties, because in Russia there was an absolute monarchy. And this oppression is also a series of uprisings, but already in the Russian Empire.

      A curious example of curettage of the virgin brain and the insertion of any Jesuit interpretation.
      1. In Russia, an absolute monarchy appeared only during the Romanovs and not immediately. Under Rurikovich, Russia is more likely to be a fighting democracy.
      2. In Lithuania there was a "Charter of Liberties" ... but only for the gentry, for the peasants there was complete lack of rights, slavery and serfdom. Serfdom in Russia appeared much later, only under the Romanovs, but it was never so widespread and so difficult as in Lithuania and Poland. Actually, this yoke was the main reason for the Khmelnytsky uprising. Although an attempt by the Jesuits to ban the Orthodox faith and language too. (Now the Jesuits are slipping a false "faith" from the huckster and schismatic Filaret)
      3. The main reason why Lithuania (and Poland) did not join Russia (after the suppression of the dynasty), but went to the Union of Lublin, concerns only the gentry. But the gentry made a decision. In Russia, the land belonged to the state (and monasteries - in society, especially church, there was a discussion about secularization; there were still a couple of specific estates - the Staritsky and Bekbulatovichi). The state gave the land to the nobles in use for the duration of the service. In Lithuania, land was the OWNERSHIP of the gentry. Naturally, for the gentry, the seizure of this property on any reasonable terms of compensation was unacceptable. But for the bulk of the people - peasants - the transition to Russian citizenship did not mean occupation, but FREEDOM !!!

      Example. When, after the Polish occupation of Rus' and the ensuing Deulinsky truce, Poland did not need the registered Cossacks and the Poles left a register of one thousand, then yesterday's warriors as part of the army of the hetman Litvin Khodkevich or the Zaporozhye hetman of the Galician Konashevich-Sagaidachny and Sagaidachny himself began to ask for Russian citizenship. Such petitions have survived. It is good that Sagaidachny then turned up a war with the Turks, in which he perished. By the way, Russia itself was then saved from the Poles and others like them not by the nobles and not the Cossacks, but by the FREE peasants - the black draft class, who armed their "black hundreds" for their money.

      It is the same now for the "Ukrainian" (well, Ukrainian wassat ) oligarchs. For them, reunification with Russia is occupation, and even worse, but for the people, reunification is FREEDOM !!! An example of the Crimea showed that the people (including Ukrainian according to ukrostatistiki) understand this clearly and without exception. But the propaganda in Ukraine is in the hands of the occupying oligarchs and their Jesuits, therefore, they commit any nonsense on behalf of the people of Ukraine. And youngsters and overgrown with fragile brains and lacking knowledge believe them.
      1. Alex Danilov
        Alex Danilov 31 May 2014 02: 15
        +1
        aha. Not for nothing that my great-grandfathers, grandfathers and fathers called Pshekov- * bathing pans. They did not count us for people.
    3. Nicholas C.
      Nicholas C. 30 May 2014 15: 45
      0
      Quote: 19morozoff89
      Hungary, Prussia and Russia (these three sections of Speech and WAS OCCUPATION). After the partition, the situation only worsened. The gentry (nobles) lost almost all their rights and liberties, because in Russia there was an absolute monarchy. And this oppression is also a series of uprisings, but already in the Russian Empire.

      A curious example of curettage of the virgin brain and the insertion of any Jesuit interpretation.
      1. In Russia, an absolute monarchy appeared only during the Romanovs and not immediately. Under Rurikovich, Russia is more likely to be a fighting democracy.
      2. In Lithuania there was a "Charter of Liberties" ... but only for the gentry, for the peasants there was complete lack of rights, slavery and serfdom. Serfdom in Russia appeared much later, only under the Romanovs, but it was never so widespread and so difficult as in Lithuania and Poland. Actually, this yoke was the main reason for the Khmelnytsky uprising. Although an attempt by the Jesuits to ban the Orthodox faith and language too. (Now the Jesuits are slipping a false "faith" from the huckster and schismatic Filaret)
      3. The main reason why Lithuania (and Poland) did not join Russia (after the suppression of the dynasty), but went to the Union of Lublin, concerns only the gentry. But the gentry made a decision. In Russia, the land belonged to the state (and monasteries - in society, especially church, there was a discussion about secularization; there were still a couple of specific estates - the Staritsky and Bekbulatovichi). The state gave the land to the nobles in use for the duration of the service. In Lithuania, land was the OWNERSHIP of the gentry. Naturally, for the gentry, the seizure of this property on any reasonable terms of compensation was unacceptable. But for the bulk of the people - peasants - the transition to Russian citizenship did not mean occupation, but FREEDOM !!!

      Example. When, after the Polish occupation of Rus' and the ensuing Deulinsky truce, Poland did not need the registered Cossacks and the Poles left a register of one thousand, then yesterday's warriors as part of the army of the hetman Litvin Khodkevich or the Zaporozhye hetman of the Galician Konashevich-Sagaidachny and Sagaidachny himself began to ask for Russian citizenship. Such petitions have survived. It is good that Sagaidachny then turned up a war with the Turks, in which he perished. By the way, Russia itself was then saved from the Poles and others like them not by the nobles and not the Cossacks, but by the FREE peasants - the black draft class, who armed their "black hundreds" for their money.

      It is the same now for the "Ukrainian" (well, Ukrainian wassat ) oligarchs. For them, reunification with Russia is occupation, and even worse, but for the people, reunification is FREEDOM !!! An example of the Crimea showed that the people (including Ukrainian according to ukrostatistiki) understand this clearly and without exception. But the propaganda in Ukraine is in the hands of the occupying oligarchs and their Jesuits, therefore, they commit any nonsense on behalf of the people of Ukraine. And youngsters and overgrown with fragile brains and lacking knowledge believe them.
    4. Alex Danilov
      Alex Danilov 31 May 2014 02: 10
      0
      In general, you're 19morozoff89-wrong. And right- smile.
  14. Roshchin
    Roshchin 30 May 2014 10: 54
    -4
    The respected author of the article writes the same fables as those who write fairy tales about the ancient "ukrah" who invented the wheel and fought with no less ancient Romans. It is especially funny that, according to the author, “they are Russians and at the same time“ Ukrainians. ”Ukraine is a state that has arisen in its modern form due to the same circumstances as modern Russia. You can deny the existence of the Ukrainian nation and the Ukrainian language (which as beautiful as Russian) but they exist regardless of someone's views. Somehow it is modestly hushed up that the Belarusians were also invented by the evil Poles, and they also worry that they are Belarusians and at the same time Russians. At the same time, let the respected Alexander Samsonov explain to the Moldovans, that they are original Romanians, and their place in the great Romania, will open the eyes of Azerbaijanis that they are Turks.
    Russians are Russians, Ukrainians are Ukrainians, Moldovans are Moldavians and nothing more. It is important not what anyone calls himself, but in order to properly build respectful relations, and not to allow American democrats and local fascists to drive a wedge between neighbors.
    1. alebor
      alebor 30 May 2014 12: 23
      +3
      I agree in you. It is really rather strange to convince a person who considers himself a Ukrainian or a Belarusan that he is mistaken and that he is not at all what he thinks of himself. And the article by A. Samsonov should be taken in an ideological way. Just as in pre-revolutionary Russia, Russians (Great Russians) and Ukrainians (Little Russians) and Belarusians were officially considered Russian, so in modern Russia it would be possible not to divide history into Russian, Ukrainian and Belarusian, but to study it as a whole, as the history of a single people but of a divided people with the hope that this separation will someday be overcome.
    2. Alex Danilov
      Alex Danilov 31 May 2014 02: 19
      0
      it's time to get back to Russia. And don’t tryn’t tongue. You tell the Americans what the Indians, Negroes and Anglo-Saxons are. And not the Americans. They’re not dumb, they don’t share.
  15. terrible
    terrible 30 May 2014 11: 04
    0
    only modern dill horseradish prove that he is Russian. as they taught during union, so they mutter. and if you instill Russianness from school, then you will see things go smoothly. the truth is all wide and Svidomo need to destroy. and their rotten anathema to give rot.
    1. Roshchin
      Roshchin 30 May 2014 11: 58
      +1
      Recipes borrowed from pravosek?
  16. foma2028
    foma2028 30 May 2014 11: 32
    +3
    from the very beginning of the "independent sabbat" in Ukraine, the seizure of Orthodox churches, the murder and persecution of Orthodox priests began. Quiet and not very quiet, Uniatism is being planted, apparently with an eye to further catholicization.
    It seems to have heard the expression before, not verbatim, but the meaning is preserved:
    "There is not a single dark matter in the world that the Vatican has not had a hand in."
    This seems to be the words of Dostoevsky, but maybe I'm confusing something.
    with Google and Yandex, could not find the source.
    Maybe someone heard this expression and to whom it belongs?
  17. maxistuff
    maxistuff 30 May 2014 11: 41
    0
    Every true Svidomo believes in the great civilization of proto-Ukrainians who have lived since the time of the dinosaurs. Once in Ukraine everything will work out, there will need a massive development of institutions for the mentally ill, entire sanatoriums for the treatment of mass psychosis of witnesses to Bandera.
  18. foma2028
    foma2028 30 May 2014 11: 50
    +4
    Living in the Kuban, where especially before and now, "people balakali", there are many Ukrainian words in the spoken language. And most of the indigenous people have the ending of the surname "enko" and relatives in Ukraine, I want to say something.
    Previously, only the western, "Bandera" regions hated the Russians.
    The inhabitants of Kiev, the center of Ukraine and especially the South-East, practically did not differ from the Russians, even in language. In Kiev they spoke approximately the "Kuban" language. In Ukrainian only in the villages. But now, after so many years of "Ukrogebels's" propaganda, the center of Ukraine hates Russia no less than the Banderaites. Even in Dnepropetrovsk there are youth, Bandera organizations.
    The West in Ukraine and Russia is acting according to the method of the Italian communist Antonio Grasch, he once said to the bourgeoisie in his famous prison notes: "It's okay, we'll take your children."
    P.S.May we have not lost everything yet.
    Today, 15 third-graders and a teacher are riding on the bus. Ties are tied to all, just like more pioneers. I asked the teacher, what are the pioneers?
    She says: These are young Cossacks! soldier smile
    1. Tolerast
      Tolerast 30 May 2014 12: 42
      +5
      Much has already been lost. Such traditional "pro-Russian" regions as Dnepropetrovsk or Zaporozhye, for example, have long turned into territories inhabited by Russian-speaking Russophobes. At least a quarter of the population of "almost our" Kharkov is Russophobic. Even in "absolutely our" Donetsk, many representatives of the younger generation, with whom I personally talked, do not really like our country. And they themselves are Russians, they have relatives living here. You have to really look at things: Donetsk and Lugansk are the last fragments of the Russian world on Urkain. The rest have a solid Savik Shuster and the advancing Putin tanks in their heads ...
  19. Tolerast
    Tolerast 30 May 2014 12: 29
    +2
    And also ancient protoucra, descendants of the Atlanteans, invented genetic engineering and technology of intergalactic flights ...
    I quite seriously read it in one pseudo-scientific book made in Ukraine ....
    Yarosh brain wassat
  20. terrible
    terrible 30 May 2014 12: 33
    -2
    here it is necessary first of all in kakylandskih schools% ah lessons to shoot.
    1. Cristall
      Cristall 31 May 2014 15: 45
      +1
      Quote: formidable
      So the first thing to do is shoot teachers in Ukrainian schools.

      damn. 4 errors corrected Ukrainian in Russian in a sentence in Russian.
      Teachers have nothing to do with it. The program is written in Kiev and they lower it. By the way, teachers are somewhat slow. Especially in the SE where they continue to intentionally read in Russian and take in Russian. This is illegal for Kiev, but we are still using it.
      It’s bad that teachers do not uphold, fear for dismissal.
      1. Natalya Myasnikova
        Natalya Myasnikova 12 October 2014 12: 14
        0
        I wonder where it is in the sentence "that's the first thing to shoot in kaklyandskih schools" Have you seen the 4 mistakes that you attribute to a Russian's ignorance of the Russian language ?! There are two mistakes: in the words "teach (e) lei" and "ras (s) trill", and your other two corrections do not apply to mistakes! By the way, you also have mistakes in words, I will not say anything about punctuation:
        1. "The teacher has nothing to do with it", and not "nothing to do with the teacher";
        2. Teachers ... are afraid - they are "what are they doing?" And not "what to do?", Which means that teachers are afraid;
        But in essence of your entire commentary, I can say that it is encouraging that SE continues to read and pass exams in Russian, but it upsets that teachers are afraid to assert their and their students' rights, speak and write in their native Russian language. If they could organize and protest together against the oppression of the Russian language, or at least collect signatures under an appeal to the authorities about the status of the Russian language, I think the result would still be positive. It’s impossible to fire everyone. Who will teach children? And silence and inaction leads precisely to the negative consequences that we are now witnessing in Ukraine.
  21. Serg93
    Serg93 30 May 2014 13: 03
    +3
    Well, if you drive into the head that Russian enemies !!!! By will not by will you begin to believe that the way it is
    1. The comment was deleted.
    2. goose
      goose 30 May 2014 13: 38
      +3
      As Adi Hitler said in his book "My Sumo": modern politicians are mistaken - you need to convey your ideas to the people in the simplest form, but as loudly and often as possible.
    3. Tolerast
      Tolerast 30 May 2014 13: 39
      +3
      Turtles have already been washed cleanly. And they poured vigorous Russophobian guan there to the brim. Now even trepanation will not help them crying It is necessary to rescue a few "survivors".
  22. goose
    goose 30 May 2014 13: 35
    +1
    Quote: 120352
    k1995
    The map, of course, is interesting, albeit small, but the main thing is that it is out of date at least twice. There is no change of borders in the Petrine era and the conquests of Catherine the Great in the Russian-Turkish war, when Novorossia additionally entered the Russian Empire.

    It also says: 17th century, when Peter I became king? Late 17th century. These changes of the era of change have not yet arrived. We can say that this is the most "short" version of the territory of Russia at that time.
  23. terrible
    terrible 30 May 2014 13: 41
    -1
    Now you’ll have to knock out those heads even more!
  24. valken
    valken 30 May 2014 14: 07
    0
    generally Russians from the outskirts
  25. The comment was deleted.
    1. The comment was deleted.
    2. Watson J.
      Watson J. 30 May 2014 14: 35
      +2
      In Ukrainian fools, open Internet day, not otherwise.
    3. Tolerast
      Tolerast 30 May 2014 14: 44
      +1
      You, my friend, seem to have broken something else lol Well - a march to the Censor, like a schoolboy!
    4. The comment was deleted.
    5. smile
      smile 30 May 2014 15: 08
      +3
      Maxim1
      Thank you for writing this rubbish of yours. :)))
      First, have fun.
      Secondly, they clearly proved that the independent people consist of completely brainless comrades. :)))
      But I was all surprised - why self-propaganda is so stupid. that seems. it’s as if it was made by oligophrenics for hydrocephalus ... it's that simple - it doesn’t affect normal people. But normal ludibandarlogs are not needed - they need semi-rational creatures with slave psychology.
      And don’t worry about us - everything will be fine with us. :)))
      But such as you brought your country to the pen, proving that it is just a political misunderstanding. Take a dip in salt, cereals, matches and candles ... and stop dreaming that we will someday feel bad - go to work, otherwise you will die of starvation in the winter, or go to trade the innocence on the panel .... :))))
  26. Taltsetl
    Taltsetl 30 May 2014 16: 10
    0
    Maxim1, my friend, flowing from site to site - the circus has already left.
  27. Zverboy
    Zverboy 30 May 2014 17: 20
    0
    And what difference now is when and why did the name Ukraine and Ukrainians appear?
    The fact of the existence of the state and people is. By the way, there is your own language in the first 10 languages ​​of the world in terms of melody and beauty. And since Ukraine is at the crossroads of the most important routes, neighboring countries have always influenced accordingly, trying to bring them under control. The only, as I think, we, only with Russia, were able to survive and remain ourselves. But the good is quickly forgotten, and the bad is remembered for a long time. So, what would they not say about us but for Ukraine and Ukrainians, we must always fight, if only because we are U (O) ​​of the land of Russia, we are standing between civilizations, even if we are bad, greedy, treacherous, corrupt, but you can’t get away from the truth and Ukrainians have done quite a lot for Russia throughout history, but now we don’t have a tsar in our heads and in power, and that’s why trouble is.
  28. X Y Z
    X Y Z 30 May 2014 17: 40
    +1
    Maybe the Ukrainian language is melodic and beautiful, but the problem is that only a small part of the population speaks it. All the rest, who speak Ukrainian for the Russian ear, actually speak only surzhik. Unknowing people can quickly find on the Internet what it is. It is also used in the border regions of Russia. Especially funny this dialect looks in the performance of Ukrainian "statesmen" claiming to be "independent".
  29. Roman 1977
    Roman 1977 30 May 2014 20: 15
    +5
    What do you say to the Ukrainian nation 140 000 years, and dinosaurs spoke exclusively on the Ukrainian mov.

    And ancient Ukrainians fought on war elephants with Persians and Greeks.




    All these inventions of the damned m.os.c.a.a..l.e. and, in general, all languages ​​in the world came from the Ukrainian mov, brought from Venus by ukro-historians, proved this:
    "The Ukrainian language is one of the most ancient languages ​​of the world. There is every reason to believe that already in the beginning of our chronology it was an inter-tribal language."
    Ukrainian language for beginners. Kiev, 2013.

    "We have reason to believe that Ovid wrote poetry in the ancient Ukrainian language."
    Gnatkevich E. From Herodotus to Photius. Gazeta "Evening Kiev", January 26, 2008

    "The ancient Ukrainian language - Sanskrit - became the mother of all Indo-European languages."
    Placinda S. Dictionary of Old Ukrainian mythology. Kiev, 1993.

    "The Ukrainian language is antediluvian, the language of Noah, the most ancient language in the world, from which the Caucasian-Japhetic, Pre-Hamitic and Pre-Semitic groups of languages ​​originated."
    Chepurko B. Ukrainians. "Osnova", No. 3, Kiev, 2004.

    "Sanskrit is based on a kind of enigmatic language" sansar ", which was carried over to our planet from Venus. Is it not about the Ukrainian language?"
    Kratko-Kutynsky A. Phenomenon of Ukraine. Gazeta "Evening Kiev", 2003.
    1. Tolerast
      Tolerast 30 May 2014 21: 13
      -1
      Offset good Catch a plus from the liberalist.
      1. smile
        smile 30 May 2014 22: 19
        +1
        Roman 1977
        hi
        Everything, as always, is up to standard.
        A novel, but the funny thing is that Sanskrit really is very similar to Russian and Ukrainian, and more to Russian. Our historians on this subject are silent, like fish on ice, giving room for any storytellers, such as Plachinda, and ours, homegrown.
        There have been interviews with Indians who are simply amazed at this fact. One thing was remembered - my aunt is studying the embroidery of national patterns, she came to us to turn the same on this thing ..... and fucked up - the similarity is impossible to coincide ... even more so she was struck by the similarity of our language with Sanskrit. And here's what to think about it? :)))
    2. Cristall
      Cristall 31 May 2014 15: 53
      0
      Quote: Novel 1977
      Ukrainian language for beginners. Kiev, 2013.

      Quote: Novel 1977
      Gnatkevich E. From Herodotus to Photius. Gazeta "Evening Kiev", January 26, 2008

      Quote: Novel 1977
      Placinda S. Dictionary of Old Ukrainian mythology. Kiev, 1993.

      Quote: Novel 1977
      Chepurko B. Ukrainians. "Osnova", No. 3, Kiev, 2004.

      Quote: Novel 1977
      Kratko-Kutynsky A. Phenomenon of Ukraine. Gazeta "Evening Kiev", 2003.

      Kiev Kiev Kiev Kiev ...
      No one else stuttered. It's just that it is politically beneficial in the capital about Ukrainians.
  30. homosum20
    homosum20 30 May 2014 20: 34
    +1
    "Historical sources of the XNUMXth-XNUMXth centuries do not know any" Ukrainians - ukrov "."
    But do they know dill? Here, from dill, dill also occurred. Cross pollination method. Through bestiality. (bestiality (from other Greek. ζῷον "animal") - pollination with the help of animals; Wikipedia).
  31. vignat21
    vignat21 30 May 2014 22: 51
    +1
    The Catholic Encyclopedia, published in 1913 at http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/, describes the Ukrainians in this way:

    “... among the Rusin of Galicia and Hungary political parties were formed ... They are divided into three main groups:

    - "Ukrainians", those who believe in the development of Rusyns on their own line, independent of Russia, Poles or Germans.

    - Moskvofily, those who look at Russia as an example of the Russian-Slavic race.

    - Ugro-Russians or “Hungarian Rusyns,” those who oppose Hungary, against its rules; those who do not want to lose their special status ... The ideas of the "Ukrainians" are especially unpleasant for them. "


    So, from the party of separatists over the course of a century a “nation” of Ukrainians has formed!
  32. vignat21
    vignat21 30 May 2014 22: 54
    0
    The Catholic Encyclopedia, published in 1913 at http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/, describes the Ukrainians in this way:

    “... among the Rusin of Galicia and Hungary political parties were formed ... They are divided into three main groups:

    - “Ukrainians”, those who believe in the development of Rusyns in their own line, independent of Russia, Poles or Germans.

    - “Moskvofily”, those who look at Russia as an example of the Russian-Slavic race.

    - "Ugro-Russians" or "Hungarian Rusyns", those who oppose Hungary, against its rules; those who do not want to lose their special status ... The ideas of the "Ukrainians" are especially unpleasant for them. "


    So, from the party of separatists over the course of a century a “nation” of Ukrainians has formed!
  33. jury08
    jury08 30 May 2014 23: 51
    -3
    The concept of Russians, Rusyns in the Middle Ages had nothing to do with modern Russia, but directly with today's Ukraine. There were no ukrov-Rusyns were the ancestors of present-day Ukrainians, masked or Muscovites-ancestors of Russians. The Grand Duchy of Lithuania was called the Grand Duchy of Lithuania Belarusians), Russian (Rusyns-ancestors of Ukrainians), Zhmudsky (Zhmudins-current Lithuanians, Latvians)
  34. Alex Danilov
    Alex Danilov 31 May 2014 01: 57
    0
    Quote: saag
    "The" Ukrainian trap "must be cut with one blow, not allowing yourself to be drawn into the enemy's games."

    I wonder how?

    Bang and wipe the United States.
  35. Nicholas C.
    Nicholas C. 31 May 2014 08: 24
    0
    Quote: smile
    Nicholas C.
    The entire aristocratic elite of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania was originally absolutely XNUMX% Lithuanian.
    All of these Mindaugas, Aghirdas, Vytautas, Kyastas were called the Lithuanians in the 13-14th century, they are still called ... Therefore, their names just testify. that initially the composition of their aristocracy was monolithic, and consisted precisely of Lithuanians. Even this small fact of stone-on-stone does not leave history removers.


    Oh how! And as I did not immediately notice! Indeed, such a Svidomo story invented by the Lithuanians. Something like that about Mindovg: www.people.su/74702 And who said that she was true? On the seal of Mindovg written by Russian runes there is no Mindaugas. None of the annals (Gustynskaya, Pskov and Ipatievskaya) feature a prince named “Mindaugas”. In the Ipatiev Chronicle, written in the Old Slavonic language, it is called Mindog. In Western sources it is called Mendogus (lat.), Myndowen (German), Mendolf (gender).

    The image of Olgerd’s seal is already publicly available in Old Russian: http://www.specnaz.ru/img/images/%D0%9B%D0%B8%D1%826.jpg And again, no Aghirdasov. So why not Algirdas call himself Algirdas? Or at least some of the Lithuanian princes at least something at least sometime to write a couple of words in Aukstein? Lithuanians are not even able to lay a small pebble in the foundation of their history.

    Here Ilovaisky is a great historian. He managed to question the Norman hypothesis. But there is at least a leaflet in the Radziwill chronicle as evidence, and in the Zhmud (Aukstait) what? But Ilovaisky could not hesitate here, adheres to German tradition, tries to tell how the prince rules in the Russian lands of Black Russia in the Orthodox Novogrudok (Ilovaiskiy writes - Novgorod), is related to the same Galician princes and is fighting for extermination with the Baltic-Lithuanians, and at the same time from them. It turned out unconvincing.

    What do we have against. Let us turn to the Ipatiev Chronicle, which is one of the most important historical sources of Russian history. In it, under 1180, the princes of Polotsk Vseslav Mikulich, Andrei Volodsic, Izyaslav and Vasilko are also referred to as princes of Lithuania. The annals also list their possessions as part of the Principality of Polotsk: Braslav, Volozhin, Zaslavl, Logoisk. In 1190, Minsk was mentioned among these possessions.
    www.semargl.me/ru/library/repository/book/12/

    In the Pskov Chronicle, under the year 1213, the “Lithuanian Prince” Vladimir Toropetsky, brother of the Novgorod Prince Mstislav Udatny, is mentioned. And even in 1239 the princes of Polotsk are also called the princes of Lithuania.
    www.semargl.me/ru/library/repository/book/25/

    The Gustynskaya Chronicle under 1246 reports that: "Mindovg will accept the Christian faith from the East with many of his boyars ... his son Voyshelk will probably take monastic vows." Unfortunately, modern historians of Russia, the Republic of Lithuania and Poland diligently ignore this chronicle message. And it is no coincidence, since the very fact of Mindovg's adoption of Christianity "from the East" unconditionally confirms that Mindovg did not fight against the Novgorod (Novogrudok) lands, but was elected a prince here, as Dovmont later in Pskov. If he were a conqueror, he would not have to accept Orthodoxy. Pagan Mindaugas in Orthodoxy Vasily, Dovmont - Timofey. The later "baptism" from Rome lasted exactly as long as the union with the Order itself.
    www.semargl.me/ru/library/repository/book/12/

    According to the Resurrection Chronicle, Mindovg comes from the dynasty of the Polotsk princes.
    www.semargl.me/ru/library/repository/book/35/

    The velvet book, written immediately after the burning of discharge books as an attempt to revive them, contains many inaccuracies, but people remembered the main thing. And here Mindovg - Russian of the Polotsk princes.
    genealogia.ru/projects/barhat/4.htm
  36. Cristall
    Cristall 31 May 2014 16: 38
    0
    climbed into history, everyone interprets in their own way. There is not even a single consensus.
    Everywhere there is a struggle for the "torch of the heir to the civilization of the Eastern Slavs."
    What in Kiev what in Moscow ..
    By the way, in Soviet history, there is quite a bit of information about Ukraine and Ukrainian lands. The period of the Lithuanian and Polish occupation is poorly covered. They quickly bring to Bogdan and there they no longer remember her. More information on Kievan Rus and the Principality of Moscow and then the State and the Republic of Ingushetia.
    Now you are no better than the Ukrainians who yell about their unique story from dinosaurs. By the way, there are few of them.
    Only you about the fact that there is no Ukraine, and no people. And they are what they have been for a long time.
    So unity cannot be achieved. In fact, only offers to become on different sides of the warring parties.
  37. mehmeh
    mehmeh 4 December 2014 14: 18
    0
    How many Ukrainians communicated. The impression is as if they consider themselves elected. it's all from soviet education
    The Soviet government relied on nationalists, and all this is a sort of sauce of internationalism and the type of a nation’s right to self-determination. It’s clear and you can see any rabble as a rule
    Not averse to anything came to power in the republics and began to sabotage the idea of ​​a single state.
  38. mehmeh
    mehmeh 4 December 2014 14: 38
    0
    This is generally a project invented in Austria-Hungary supported by the Bolsheviks. The Bolsheviks relied on nationalist circles wherever they could in the Urals in Siberia in Central Asia Caucasus
    So Bendera’s need to put a monument to Lenin to Stalin and not to demolish.
    The grimace of history is that on the territory of Ukraine the people of beggars and a billion dollars are money for which you can overthrow any government, plus lawlessness, you don’t even have to hold elections who control gangs of the nationalist group
    And try them across what you say
    And the money is allocated to the USA
    And Putin is talking about some Ukrainian people
    This people exists as long as the Fed prints tanks))