On the importance of the return of the Russian people to their Russian people

On the importance of the return of the Russian people to their Russian people

Indeed, firm support and unshakable ground for national consciousness

and self-knowledge always serves national History.
I.Ye. Zabelin


The main weakness of the modern Russian people is a significant loss of memory, the erosion of Russian culture itself, its transformation into Russian-speaking culture. Losing Your Own So, residents of Indian, Chinese, Japanese civilizations carefully keep theirs - their holidays, national clothes, martial arts, beliefs of their ancestors, their names, carefully preserve the memory of their history, without building a blasphemy. Preserve the continuity of generations, educate children through national films, music. Take the same China - in their films, the students of Shaolin defeat all enemies. In reality, China was bit more than once by the northern invaders, by the British, by the Japanese, most of China’s battles are internal disassemblies. China almost always lost to external enemies. But the main thing is that children are brought up on the principles of winners, and not forever whining defeatists.

Why is it that in Russia they also do not carefully preserve or restore the heritage of pagan Russia ?! Why, say, Perun's Day is not celebrated at the national level? We are no longer a Christian country and not atheistic, the Russian Federation is a secular state, and the pagan past is also our heritage. Pre-Christian Russia is just the “Atlantis” of our history, which carries tremendous opportunities for the revival of Russian culture, the Russian Spirit. For example, environmental education, Russian martial arts (they will say no, let's think out!). It is necessary to return to Russian children, and to the adult Russian Gods, our spirits - and then their brains are clogged with all sorts of alien garbage like Hercules, Tarzans, terminators, aphrodite, goblins, elves. This is a real war in the sphere of consciousness: the one who “loads programs” in people's brains is the master. If a Russian person does not have His own head, how can he stand against a stranger and still win ?! Why not create a Russian fashion designers, or rather not restore the Russian style in clothes? To make it beautiful, comfortable and yours - Russian!

Every year, with the mass of events, the Day of the Beginning of Slavic Literature is celebrated, which was given to the “wild” Slavs by the Christian enlighteners Cyril and Methodius. But the same Kirill mentions that he saw two books written by “Russian letters”! There is already a lot of evidence that in pre-Christian Russia there was not even one, but several types of writing.

Creation of Russian fleet associated with Peter the Great. But why are sea trips of Russian princes - Askold and Dir, Oleg, Igor forgotten? Why forgotten the rooks of the Novgorodians, the discovery by the Pomors of Spitsbergen, a flotilla of ear-flies, Cossacks? Russian fleet at least 12 centuries!

February 23 celebrates Defender of the Fatherland Day, and when it was called the Day of the Soviet Army, everything was right and right. But now this day has become the Day of Defender of the Fatherland, it turns out that the soldiers of the Russian Imperial Army, the Russian Tsarist armies, the Russian princely armies have nothing to do with it ?! They have nothing to do with 23 February, since, according to the logic of the renamers, an army was then created, which then participated in the fratricidal Civil War? It would be more accurate to preserve the memorable day of the Soviet Army, and to define the Day of Defender of the Fatherland on one of the memorable days associated with the significant victories of the Russian soldiers. Say, July 3 (capture of Svyatoslav Itil, the capital of the Khazar Kaganate), April 5 (Ice Battle, victory over the Crusaders, Russia over the West) or May 2 (fall of Berlin, surrender of his garrison).

It is time for Russians to remember who we are, that Russia is Russia, not Holland. It's time to learn to respect your past, your roots, and therefore yourself.
Ctrl Enter

Noticed a mistake Highlight text and press. Ctrl + Enter

239 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. Konstantm 8 July 2011 09: 14 New
    • 2
    • 0
    +2
    Everything is correct. But as usual, the enemies of the whole Russian will howl, because, they say, the Russian chauvinists again dream of the Empire ...
  2. dimitriy
    dimitriy 8 July 2011 10: 04 New
    • 3
    • 0
    +3
    Yesterday I got a link to a video in Yu-tube from T. Kandelaki, she said throughout the country that the Russians as a nation are no longer there, and this has already been proved by scientists (apparently Georgian :)). But THIS is shown on TV !!!! Gon ..., I'm sorry, Gordon on TV in his program states that the greatest tragedy of our time is that some individuals let Russian people know their true history, which in his opinion is of course completely falsified! That the emergence of a national idea in the Russians will lead to the fact that "no one imagines himself to be the greatest people on the planet." They show it on TV, show us RUSSIAN !!! And we do not care ?????
    1. mr.Alphonse
      mr.Alphonse 9 July 2011 19: 03 New
      • 0
      • 0
      0
      I hope this is only you have seen)) otherwise - the Riot and all of these Kandelaki and Go .. donov to the gallows, and it is better to quarter, and hang body parts on the Moscow, Kazan, Rostov and Novgorod Kremlin.
  3. Mr. Truth
    Mr. Truth 8 July 2011 10: 27 New
    • 1
    • 0
    +1
    dimitriy
    Kandelaki probably rarely happens in his homeland and probably does not notice that the country has long belonged to Turkey. Do not start from this, they are drain barrels and drain barrels from Georgia (I mean journalists).
  4. S.N.M.
    S.N.M. 8 July 2011 10: 39 New
    • 1
    • 0
    +1
    Rethinking the past and turning history into reality is the first and most important step on the road to the revival of our homeland.
  5. S.N.M.
    S.N.M. 8 July 2011 11: 08 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    (dimitriy
    "Gordon on TV in his broadcast states that the greatest tragedy of our time is that some individuals let the Russian people know their true history, that in his opinion, of course, complete falsification! That the emergence of a national idea in the Russians will lead to the fact that" no one from nothing he imagines himself the greatest people on the planet ")
    For Gordon, this is a sore subject: http://rutube.ru/tracks/1037879.html
  6. Gordon
    Gordon 8 July 2011 12: 10 New
    • -8
    • 0
    -8
    What is in the way? Probably many, unlike the author, know the story.
    What relation does KIEV RUSSIA have to Russians? Only the most distant.
    On the territory of KIEV RUSSIA Slavic tribes lived, but in no way all Slavic tribes can be attributed not only to the Russians, they can not even be attributed to all Ukrainians.
    The history of the Russian state should probably begin much later, but not as with the history of KIEV RUSSIA (well, if you do not have your own Russian history).
    "... Askold and Dir, Oleg, Igor? ..." Oleg and Igor the princes of KIEV RUSSIA.
    Askold and Deer are the most Russian people. You still remember the legendary prince KIA.
    THERE WASN'T SUCH A STATE-RUSSIAN RUSSIA, there was a state.-KIEV RUSSIA, Moscow principality, Novgorod, Pskov ..... so on.
    1. Smirnov Vadim 8 July 2011 12: 24 New
      • 0
      • 0
      0
      But here I am interested in the word "Rus" from which word occurred or the word "Russians"?
      1. Joker
        Joker 8 July 2011 12: 26 New
        • 0
        • 0
        0
        I heard a version from hair color, that is, brown.
        1. Smirnov Vadim 8 July 2011 12: 28 New
          • 0
          • 0
          0
          I actually meant - is there a connection between these two words? And then Mr. Gordon denies the like.
  7. dimitriy
    dimitriy 8 July 2011 12: 41 New
    • 3
    • 0
    +3
    Vadimis
    between Kievan Rus and Russians? Of course not what! Kievan Rus was not even inhabited by Slavs, it was inhabited by Rabinovichi from Odessa and pizza delivery men from Pindostana. It was the enlightened Rabinovichi and Gordons who gave such a beautiful name to this unprepossessing terrain, than unusually ennobled it and the people, it was not clear how they appeared, and even calling themselves Rusichs.
  8. Konstantm 8 July 2011 12: 48 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    Who loves History, Russia (Russia), for a start I advise you to read the "Memory" of Chivilikhin.
  9. Vasya
    Vasya 8 July 2011 12: 59 New
    • -4
    • 0
    -4
    I am amazed at the authors of such articles.

    Comedy!

    He writes about Russia before Baptism, about Russia since the time of Princes Oleg and Igor.

    And what does Russia have to do with it?

    This applies only to Ukraine!

    In Central Russia - the Volga-Oksk interfluve of that time, it is not necessary to talk about Oleg and Igor!

    And ABOUT FINNO-UGORIAN peoples, their culture and realities!

    What does Kiev and Ukraine of that time have to do with Russia?

    If you want to study your past, then you need to look for it among Meri, Meshchera, Murom, Mordovians, Vesy, Moksha, Cheremis, Zyryan-Komi, etc.

    In short, study the past of the Finno-Ugric peoples.
    1. Smirnov Vadim 8 July 2011 13: 08 New
      • 2
      • 0
      +2
      As Shakespeare said in the 19 sonnet: "Walk, Vasya !!!" (Only old people go into battle)
    2. mr.Alphonse
      mr.Alphonse 9 July 2011 17: 32 New
      • 0
      • 0
      0
      I bet you're a fool))
    3. mr.Alphonse
      mr.Alphonse 9 July 2011 18: 08 New
      • 0
      • 0
      0
      But were Igor and Oleg Ukrainians?
  10. alebor 8 July 2011 13: 12 New
    • 1
    • 0
    +1
    Throughout its history, Russia has been a Russian, Orthodox state. Pagan gods (in contrast to the same Japan) have long been forgotten, and in addition to the names of several of them, we actually do not know anything about them. Trying to revive primitive paganism in traditionally Christian Russia is about trying to dress everyone in bast shoes and put them on carts, forget L. Tolstoy and F. Dostoevsky and read only J. Tolkien and J. Rowling. Instead of the "Brothers Karamazov" - Harry Potter with the hobbits. I can imagine a picture: on the Red Square in Moscow, the idol of Perun stands on the site of the mausoleum, and sacrifices are taking place on the Forefront!
    1. mr.Alphonse
      mr.Alphonse 9 July 2011 17: 52 New
      • 0
      • 0
      0
      I agree with the author in many ways, but of course you took everything too close to your heart, in many ways the author is right, of course the statue of Perun is too much, but among the pagans, as far as I know, sacrifices were forbidden. We just have to preserve our culture and memory, and disseminate it, for example, the Americans, whose history is short and very meager, but for some reason they managed to make their brand out of hamburgers and cowboys. And we with our thousand-year history cannot. What is the problem? Are we ashamed of her, are we ashamed of our vast rich lands? Are we ashamed that we are Russian? Are we ashamed of our balalaika? Are we ashamed of our brave grandfathers and ancestors who defended our land at the cost of blood and sweat? We didn’t rob her and didn’t graze horses like the same cowboys did, then we are doomed to death.
  11. Vasya
    Vasya 8 July 2011 13: 18 New
    • -3
    • 0
    -3
    dimitriy

    In the 19th art. the famous Russian writer Aksakov wrote a letter to Dostoevsky.
    In the letter, Aksakov noted that the word "Russians" is abnormal for Russia, the language itself does not tolerate it.

    And he asks the question to Dostoevsky, how does the appeal to the people sound throughout Russia? And he answers: "Orthodox"!

    Of the ethnonyms of the past, one can still name the word "peasant", which came from "Christian." So the people of Russian principalities were called in the Golden Horde.

    This indicates the enormous role of the Orthodox Church for Russia of those times.

    Now with regards to the word "Russian".

    Before Peter the Great, until 1721, the word "Russians" is rare, book, and means a believer in the Russian Orthodox Church, its Moscow branch.

    The word "Russian" is of Byzantine origin, the word contains this Greek doubling "-c-". And its meaning is church, not folk.

    Analogues of the word "Russian" until 1721 are a Baptist, Catholic, Lutheran, Anglican, etc.

    Peter the Great in 1721 ordered everyone to be called Russian, that is, he transferred this concept from church confessional to ethnic.

    As we see, the rejection of this term lasted until the 19th century.

    And further. Do not confuse the word "Russian" and "Russian". The latter is an adjective to the ethnonym "RUSIN", that is, a Ukrainian from the era of princely Russia.

    The word "Russian" has no noun, substantive.
    The word "Russian" has a noun, substantive. This is a Rusyn.
  12. RUSICH
    RUSICH 8 July 2011 13: 51 New
    • 2
    • 0
    +2
    Mr. Samsonov well done touches on lively topics.
    You need to clean the media, listen to our TV and think that you are behind the hill.
    Fresh, security ............ and this is now our speech. It's a shame before the children
    they ask what it is, but you don’t know. After all, there is our juice guard.
  13. Stephen
    Stephen 8 July 2011 14: 10 New
    • 4
    • 0
    +4
    Yes reborn great country brothers !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
  14. SLAVA 8 July 2011 14: 16 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    Listen to Vasya!
    Before carrying their nonsense to the masses, it would be better if they found out before the victory that there is the concept of the Orthodox. I can give some tips like Nikon and his reform !!!!!)))) By the way, look at the etymology of the word ORTHODOX !!
  15. dimitriy
    dimitriy 8 July 2011 14: 18 New
    • 3
    • 0
    +3
    Vasya
    amazed by your knowledge in the heart! Can also be beautifully and reasonably explain what it means: "Ukrainian of the era of princely Rus."
    1. Uhalus 8 July 2011 23: 37 New
      • -1
      • 0
      -1
      It's irony? Then there was no Ukraine. Then there were the Russians (Russians are tribes belonging to the Russians). Ukrainians themselves did not like the word "Ukraine", calling themselves Russian, this word is the name-invention of the 19th century.
      But I find the idea of ​​an article about the preservation and knowledge of traditions, love of my history _zh_i_z_n_e_n_n_o_ important for the Russian people. And the importance of this idea will not be interrupted by any "mistakes" of this article.
  16. Vasya
    Vasya 8 July 2011 14: 27 New
    • -2
    • 0
    -2
    RUSICH

    First of all, “Rusich” is not a historical word. It is found in one place of everything in the "Word of Igor’s Regiment".

    This word is considered a copyist error.

    Such a people as Rusich did not exist at all in nature.
    From it it is even impossible to create a feminine form.

    But in Russia there were Rus. This is confirmed by thousands of documents of those times and later.

    Starting with the Treaties of Princes Oleg and Igor with Byzantium, the text contains a clear ethnonym "RUSIN".

    In Soviet times, party falsifiers of history replaced the ethnonym "Rusyns" with "Russians."

    They committed forgery, fraud.
    And such a blizzard was given to the population to read.

    But Rusyns are not Russians. The Rusyns never lived in Veliky Novgorod, the Rusyns never lived in Suzdal, Ryazan, Smolensk, Murom, etc.

    Rusin is a Ukrainian.

    And now secondly.

    Tell me, why in Russian are the names of the months borrowed, Western European? January-February-March-April-May-June-July-August-September-October-November-December.


    These are not Slavic names.

    Here, for example, the Ukrainian language does not sin.
    The Ukrainian names of the months are native, Slavic.
    Lime-lutium-birch-tree-quarter-grass-grass-cherten-lipen-sickle-heather-veresen-zhovten-li
    stopad-chest.

    As you can see, the Russian language loses to Ukrainian in "Slavic" on the simplest examples.

    So why do you resent such words as “fresh” and “security”?
    1. SLAVA 8 July 2011 14: 33 New
      • 1
      • 0
      +1
      )))) Well, please answer well in what language is written "The word about Igor's regiment !?))
      I guess, probably on the "urainka mov"))))
    2. Eric
      Eric 8 July 2011 14: 42 New
      • 0
      • 0
      0
      You are ours, our ancestors had borders, from the Balkans to the northern lands. Muscovites said, walk Vasya! :)
  17. RUSICH
    RUSICH 8 July 2011 15: 02 New
    • 1
    • 0
    +1
    Dear Vasily, the whole western world considers us a mistake or
    typo. But you know, I’m proud that RUSICH and my children
    educate in this spirit
  18. avreli
    avreli 8 July 2011 15: 07 New
    • 3
    • 0
    +3
    I am "with you" funny, dear.
    Wash off your slippers, you can throw yourself.
    Well, what the fuck ... the difference was the Russians under Vladimir the Red Sun or not.
    What do you, as an impoverished nobility in your ancestors, look for honor ... And yourself?
    By the way, the current central Russia is Vyatichi, but Krivichi.
    Vyatichi people are very independent, and even Oleg (Prophetic) did not conquer them.
    And autonomy was maintained practically until the XIII century, and ethnic identity until the XVIIth.
    As a result, they became the ethnic basis of the Chernigov, Ryazan, Smolensk, Vladimir-Suzdal principality. And together with the Ilmen Slavs (Slovenes) and Krivichs created the Russian core. And the Finno-Ugrians assimilated (translated ... literally and figuratively). Do not forget, before the beginning of the 6th century, the birth rate in Russia is 8 children.
    And what the chroniclers write: Vyatichi and Krivichi are wild people smile “Not knowing the law of God, but creating the law for oneself”
    And then so many smart men gathered ... It's time, it's time ...
  19. Vasya
    Vasya 8 July 2011 15: 20 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    Vadimis

    About the origin of the name "Rus" - that is a lot of controversy.

    There are dozens of versions, even about 40 it seems.

    But the main two.

    Local and Norman.

    Most likely, the name Rus is local, because it is known long before Prince Oleg, before the Norman expansion.

    The version is such that "Rus" is the name of one of the ancient Iranian tribes of the Scythians and Sarmatians.

    The Slavs ancestors of Ukrainians living in the territory of modern Ukraine adopted this Iranian name for themselves.

    The first mention of the Norse Vikings is their attack on Britain from 787.

    But in 4 tbsp. Gothic historian Yordan mentions the Slavic tribe ROSSOMONOV living on the middle and lower Dnieper.

    In the middle of 6 tbsp. Syrian author Pseudo-Zachary Ritor writes about the North Black Sea and Podneprovsky tribe and calls it "ROS".

    And there are still plenty of sources.
    1. mr.Alphonse
      mr.Alphonse 9 July 2011 17: 56 New
      • 0
      • 0
      0
      But about the origin of the word "Ukraine" and so everything is clear.
  20. bandura70
    bandura70 8 July 2011 15: 24 New
    • 2
    • 0
    +2
    I don’t know how Vasya is, but I was taught in the old Soviet school that the Eastern Slavs are no more than the ancestors of the three peoples of Russia, Ukraine, Belarus. None of them escaped confusion with other peoples, both passing and living in the vast East European (Russian) plain. It is true that modern Russians arose from mixing the came of Slavic tribes with the Finno-Ugric and Turkic peoples, but modern Ukrainians are the result of mixing the Eastern Slavs with the same Finno-Ugric (Hungarians), Tatars, etc., so there is a debate about the degree purity of Slavic blood, in this case, reminiscent of disputes about the length of the t ... between faces of the puberty period. There is a lot of theory about the origin of the Eastern Slavs. In Soviet times, it was a textbook, according to which the Eastern Slavs migrated to the BER from Central Europe, in several streams, one of them to the middle Dnieper, the other between the Oka and Volga rivers. Subsequently, under pressure from the Turkic tribes who developed the northern Black Sea coast, many inhabitants of the Dnieper migrated to the north. So, according to the version of Ukrainian patriots, modern Russians can be considered Ukrainians. However, all three "brotherly" peoples have the same dubious attitude to the inhabitants of the Kyrgyz Republic as modern Bulgarians to the southern Slavs, i.e. There is no direct, direct relationship. We are the result of prolonged incest of the entire complex of peoples living in the territory of the once great state, from which the pygmies remained ready, exactly according to Dostoevsky, to sip each other's throats at the first opportunity.
  21. Vasya
    Vasya 8 July 2011 15: 38 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    SLAVA Today, 14:33

    )))) Well, please answer well in what language is written "The word about Igor's regiment !?))
    I guess, probably on the "urainka mov"))))

    -------------------------------------------------- ----------------

    "Word ..." is written in Church Slavonic, the official literary language of Ruthenians (Ukrainians) of that time, with a large number of actually Ukrainian words.

    The Rusyns themselves (Ukrainians) in the 12th Art. They spoke Ukrainian, or rather, the language that is the direct ancestor of modern Ukrainian.

    Before the Church Slavonic Cyril and Methodius (Old Bulgarian) language in Russia, people spoke their own, ancient language of Russia.
    Actually, this is Ukrainian.

    Church Slavonic in Russia served as the official language of church services, correspondence of the ruling elite, clergy and nobility.

    In general, "The Word ..." is a fake from the 18th century, antique stylization, written by the student of the seminary Ivan Bykovsky.

    And if the "Word ..." were not a fake, but were an authentic work, then tell, WHAT SIDE RUSSIA to the events described in the work?

    Events "Words about Igor’s Regiment" take place in Ukraine, on its lands, concern its people.

    And Suzdal, by the way, in those days were allies of the Polovtsy - the enemies of Russia.

    So to call the "Word ..." an early, ancient work of "Russian" literature is some kind of perversion.

    Well, we understand that Russia did not have literature, and it attributed to itself either the works of others or the falsifications.

    By the way, Zadonshchina is also fake.
    1. SLAVA 8 July 2011 15: 45 New
      • 0
      • 0
      0
      Quote: Vasya
      Before the Church Slavonic Cyril and Methodius (Old Bulgarian) language in Russia, people spoke their own, ancient language of Russia. Actually, this is Ukrainian.

      ))) You yourself probably ride with laughter from what you write !!!! Clever trolling.
      Quote: Vasya
      Events "Words about Igor’s Regiment" take place in Ukraine

      Tell me when and as a result, a state like Ukraine appeared ??????
    2. Joker
      Joker 8 July 2011 15: 48 New
      • 2
      • 0
      +2
      smiled:

      Quote: Vasya
      Well, we understand that Russia did not have literature,


      I wonder who is meant by the word "we" in this saying?

      Not a bunch of basement onanist-national-Ukrainians?

      PS I have nothing against normal Ukrainians.
  22. Vasya
    Vasya 8 July 2011 15: 57 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    SLAVA Today, 14:16
    0
    Listen to Vasya!
    Before carrying their nonsense to the masses, it would be better if they found out before the victory that there is the concept of the Orthodox. I can give some tips like Nikon and his reform !!!!!)))) By the way, look at the etymology of the word ORTHODOX !!
    -------------------------------------------------- ------------------------------
    -------------------------------

    Ha, so it's not me, but Aksakov! 19 tbsp! ))))

    In general, about the ethnonym of Russians before 1721, this is a difficult question.

    As Russian historians themselves write, the original inhabitants of Zalesye, Central Russia, WERE NOT NAME ANYTHING.

    A people without a name.

    Sobolevsky A. I. Russian people as an ethnographic whole. - Lviv, 1911.

    Then the Tatars began to call them the word "rayat", which means "herd."

    From the 14th Art. by faith they began to call them "peasants."

    Already as Moscow strengthened, Muscovy emerged, the words "MOSKOVIT", "MOSKVIN", "MOSKOVITYANIN", "MOSKVITIN", "MOSKVICH", "MOSKAL" appeared.

    But so they called the inhabitants of neighboring states.

    In the lands of Zalesye, the internal ethnonym "peasants" was constantly preserved, without interruption, and from the 15th century. became common.

    These Tatars were recorded by non-Muslims by their ethnonym, and future Russians themselves clearly adhered to this ethnonym in order to fix themselves separately from the Tatars.

    You can read it in the book.
    Grekov B. D. Peasants in Russia from ancient times to the 1952th century. — M.: Publishing House of the USSR Academy of Sciences, 1. Kn XNUMX.

    And then there were the "Orthodox".

    Letters of I. S. Aksakov to F. M. Dostoevsky // Bulletin of the USSR Academy of Sciences. Ser. lit. and language. — 1972. — Vol. 4.— T.— 81.
    1. Joker
      Joker 8 July 2011 16: 27 New
      • 2
      • 0
      +2
      Quote: Vasya
      Then the Tatars began to call them the word "rayat", which means "herd."


      by the way
      - The Great Lomonosov, later Morozov called into question the fidelity of the theory of the Tatar-Mongol yoke.
  23. avreli
    avreli 8 July 2011 16: 27 New
    • 4
    • 0
    +4
    Vasya! Encyclopedic you are ours.
    Oh well, what's the difference.
    You are a smart person, and, you see, educated.
    What difference does it make before 1721.
    It is important that now!
    Here we conducted a study of the genotype-phenotype of the current Russian, generalized portraits were made. The image is not blurry - homogeneous. And I look at one - and for sure - my friend Yura Kotov, and the other - the wife’s mother in her youth - just a photo.
    We are! Is there russians in here!
    And let the gon ... gordon and tsunarefki shut up.
    In general, the filthy words have long been time to hammer in the throats. And so that they couldn’t breathe. smile
    And if we live in different places, or there are no forces, then at least we will formulate clear meanings for young animals.
    And do not zami, and empty flicks, such as were "Russian" or "Russian".
    And in general, we all owe ... smile
  24. Vasya
    Vasya 8 July 2011 16: 46 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    dimitriy today, 14:18

    Vasya
    amazed by your knowledge in the heart! Can also be beautifully and reasonably explain what it means: "Ukrainian of the era of princely Rus."
    -------------------------------------------------- ------------------------------
    -----------------------

    Rusin is a Ukrainian.

    So called Ukrainians from 9 tbsp. 19 tbsp.

    And Russia is a plural of the word "Rusyns". Then there was no such form as "Rusyns", it appeared later.

    Russia as a collective concept of Rusyns (Ukrainians).
    The analogies are as follows.

    Chudin (unit) - Chud (multip.)

    Serbin (unit) - Serbia (multip.)

    Rusin (unit) - Russia (multip.)

    It also concerned such plural forms as "mob", "know", "servants".

    That is, Russia is the people of Rusyns - Ukrainians.

    The Rusyns did not live in Veliky Novgorod or Suzdal, which means that these lands are not Russia.

    This is what we see in the annals.

    We are reading the Novgorod first annals.

    "It's 6643 [1135] .... It's the same for the winter, ide v Rus archepiskop Nifont with the best men and stagnants of the Kyans, with Zernigovites standing against themselves, and a multitude of howls; "

    “That's 6657 [1149]. Ide Archepiskop Novgorod Novgorod Nifont in Russia, called Izyaslav and Klim the Metropolitan ... "

    "There is 6688 [1180]. The Prince Prince Mistislav Novegorod Rostislavits, the grandson of Mistislavl, ....... And I sent Novgorod to Svyatoslav in Russia according to his son, and bringing Volodimir to Novgorod, and putting him on the table on August 17 ... "
  25. Vasya
    Vasya 8 July 2011 16: 48 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    dimitriy today, 14:18

    Vasya
    amazed by your knowledge in the heart! Can also be beautifully and reasonably explain what it means: "Ukrainian of the era of princely Rus."
    -------------------------------------------------- ------------------------------
    -----------------------
    Read more.

    Ipatiev Chronicle.
    1187 year.

    "... The same days since the great days of the Ambassador, Prince Rurik Hlb Prince Knight Shyurin his wife. Chyurnou with his wife. inject many bor with wives to Yuryevich to the great Vsevolodou in Soudal on Verkhouslavou for Rostislav and on Borish day and Verkhouslavou In the daughter of your great prince Vsevolod and yes, for her, a great deal of the multitude was free of gold and silver, and give your swat a great gift, and with great honor, let Exh, according to your daughter's sweetheart, become three and a cry for goodbye and mute zeanier b mila ima and mlada sushi mass media lt and so many gift dav and let go to Russia with great love for the prince of Roslav ... "

    That is, Prince Rurik of Kiev sent to Suzdal to marry the 8-year-old daughter of Prince Vsevolod Verkhuslav for his son Rostislav.
    Prince Vsevolod gave a large dowry for his daughter and "let her go to Russia."

    And then there.
    "... align Rurik Rostislavou Velmy Silnoe Svadbou aka there is no beval in Rousy and bsha at weddings knzi mnozi for knzi demolition of his own gave many gifts and the city of Brgin is the same matchmaker and let him go to Vsevolodou to Soudal with great honor and a gift to many ... "

    That is, Prince Rurik celebrated a big wedding for his son, "which had never happened in Russia," and the matchmaker and the boyars "released to Vsevolod in Suzdal."

    And there are plenty of such evidence in the annals, which indicate that Veliky Novgorod and Suzdal did not enter into Russia.

    We went from Novgorod to Russia, from Suzdal to Russia, and from Russia to Novgorod, and from Russia to Suzdal.

    And this is in the 12th century!

    In the 19th century, closer to the end of the century, Rusyns were renamed into Ukrainians.

    In the Carpathians, a small number of non-renamed Rusyns still remained, that is, this process was not completed and stopped in the Carpathians.
  26. Vasya
    Vasya 8 July 2011 16: 58 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    Joker Today, 16:27
    The great Lomonosov, later Morozov, called into question the fidelity of the theory of the Tatar-Mongol yoke.
    -------------------------------------------------- ----------------

    That's right, there was no yoke.

    The forest was actually the northern part of the state of the Golden Horde.

    This was the Golden Horde itself.

    How can there be a “yoke” in relation to your state?

    This is the same as saying, for example, that Krasnoyarsk is under the Russian yoke.
    1. Joker
      Joker 8 July 2011 17: 01 New
      • 0
      • 0
      0
      The Golden Horde, with the capital consisting of a ring of cities (it is also the golden ring of Russia, Yaroslavl, etc.)
  27. dimitriy
    dimitriy 8 July 2011 17: 01 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    Vasya
    I wish you a speedy recovery, otherwise you’ll be late ....

    avreli
    very well said, thanks!
  28. rumpeljschtizhe
    rumpeljschtizhe 8 July 2011 17: 10 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    ..all the Intersen from where the image of the Tatar of that period arose
    1. Joker
      Joker 8 July 2011 17: 14 New
      • 1
      • 0
      +1
      The theory was created by two Prussian professors (I don’t remember the names of Lomonosov’s contemporaries), and then intensively supported, perhaps this theory was to the hand of the Romanov family.
  29. Vasya
    Vasya 8 July 2011 17: 13 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    SLAVA Today, 15:45

    Tell me when and as a result, a state like Ukraine appeared ??????


    Ukraine is a recreated state of Russia.

    The same people - Rusyns Ukrainians.

    The language is the same - Russian Ukrainian (but not Russian), (of course, has undergone changes over a long period, but not dramatic).

    Geographically, Ukraine is in the same place as Russia.

    Attributes in Ukraine is the same as in Russia.

    The trident is the heraldic sign of the princes of Russia Svyatoslav, Vladimir the Great, Yaroslav the Wise.

    The flag is yellow-blue. The colors of the princes of Russia.

    Money. Hryvnia - monetary units of Russia.

    Name Ukraine - the second name of Russia since 1187.

    What about Russia?

    The redone Dutch flag - the tricolor, the coat of arms - the Byzantine, the Monomakh hat - and that Tatar, made by oriental masters in the Golden Horde.

    And for some reason, Russia, not Russia. Strange name change.

    The answer is simple.

    Everyone in Europe and the East knew what Russia was and where it was located. It is Ukraine.

    And Muscovy could not be called Russia, otherwise it would be idiocy.

    Moreover, Peter the Great was afraid that if he called his Muscovy "Rus", then everyone would perceive it as secondary, annexed Russia. But that didn’t suit him.

    He longed for primacy, therefore he called himself a term from the language of another state.

    Question. Who calls his country a name from the language of a foreign state?
  30. dimitriy
    dimitriy 8 July 2011 17: 17 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    Vasya Today, 16:48
    and where is the answer? where is at least one mention of a Ukrainian? Maybe because the first mention of Ukraine pops up only in the nineteenth century? Why did you get the idea that Ruthenian is Ukrainian, not Belarusian, Russian, or maybe Moldovan at all? Only on a territorial basis? Do not fool us. We are one people, well, probably except Vasi from Lviv - he is from another planet.
  31. Konstantm 8 July 2011 17: 20 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    Vasya ... In the 19th century, closer to the end of the century, the Rusyns were renamed into Ukrainians ...

    Rather, they were renamed malorosov, Ukrainians already at the advice.
  32. Lightforcer
    Lightforcer 8 July 2011 17: 26 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    Vasisualiy, and what kind of continuity can Kievan Rus and Ukrainians be talking about? You do not have a relationship with her. (at least direct). Your language has little in common with Old Russian, look carefully, 70% of the words are taken from Polish. As for the name of the months, as a rule, all knowledge in the language ends there. By God it’s funny, you are far from the first Ukrainian who writes such things. You are so formulaic and predictable. Feeling brainwashing. I am interested in languages, so it’s ridiculous for me to read statements about Old Ukrainian and Old Bulgarian. The linguist will generally break such sayings to pieces. Rusky by the way - Ukrainism, nowhere and never have the inhabitants of Russia been called so, but it is funny that the inhabitants of the Moscow principality call themselves Rusyns in ancient writings. What is not surprising, the people in Russia alone.
  33. Vasya
    Vasya 8 July 2011 17: 30 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    bandura70 Today, 15:24 PM

    The ancestors of the Ukrainian people are 7 East Slavic peoples.
    glade, Drevlyane, Siveryan, street, Volhynian, Tivertsy, white Croats.

    The ancestors of the Belarusian people are 4 East Slavic people.
    Krivichi, Dregovichi, Radimichi, Polotsk.

    The East Slavic people of Novgorod, who are a mixture of Slovenes and Scandinavians - a separate people - were completely destroyed in the 16th century. Muscovy.

    This people is no more.

    And who are the ancestors of the Russian people?

    Vyatichi is a small tribe that has dissolved in the Finno-Ugric Sea of ​​Central Russia.

    Russian ancestors have Finno-Ugric tribes.
    Meria, Meshchera, Murom, Mordovia, Erzya, all, moksha, wild birds, Komi zyryans, etc.

    There were no movements of the Slavs in the forest to the Finno-Ugric lands.

    This is not documented, nor archaeologically, nor culturally, in any way.

    And even more so, with regard to the geographical nomenclature of Central Russia, even now, after 1000 years of renaming, more than 50% of the hydro- and toponyms of Central Russia are Finno-Ugric.

    Example.

    The Finno-Ugric village of Saarskaya Myza was renamed Tsarskoye Selo, then Detskoe Selo, then the city of Pushkin.

    The most famous Finno-Ugric names.
    Moscow, Sudzhal, Volga, Oka (Finnish Jok - river), Kama, Ryazan (Erzya), Vologda, Vychegda, Scheksna, etc.

    And Belarusian Smolensk was annexed by force to Muscovy in the 16th century. He and the Ukrainian Kuban and Sloboda are not taken into account.
    This is the land of Belarusians and Ukrainians, which are part of Russia and declared "Russian".
  34. Banshee 8 July 2011 17: 42 New
    • 1
    • 1
    0
    Fomenko and Nosovsky spoke best on this topic in their New Chronology. Check out who is interested, there are both books and films on torrents.
    And it will become clear where the Ukrainian hands that founded Russia are growing from. And why are we so "loved" abroad.
    Look, you will not regret.

    Vasya, you should not look / read.
  35. Vasya
    Vasya 8 July 2011 17: 50 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    avreli Today, 15:07

    Vyatichi dispersed in the Finno-Ugric Sea, and there was no mention of them.

    Too few of them will be Slavs in the entire Finno-Ugric gene pool.

    Sloven Novgorod and Pskov do not sculpt.

    This separate nation was completely knocked out, destroyed under the root of Muscovy in the 16th century. This is after the plague, when so many of them died.

    After this Novgorod pogrom, according to travelers, Novgorod, after 15 years, was unpopulated and lay in ruins.

    As for the Krivichs, these are the ancestors of Belarusians.

    Do you really want to say that Russians come from Belarusians?

    Center Krivichy Smolensk, yes.

    But you forget that Smolensk was annexed, cut off from the rest of Belarus (then Lithuania) in the 16th art.

    It was a foreign people to Moscow and Russia, because in the second half of the 18th century. (!!!) Catherine the Second issued a decree on the forcible Russification of the Smolensk region.

    That is, Smolensk did not speak Russian (in Moscow) right up to the end of the 18th century!

    The movements of the Slavs from Novgorod, Smolensk, Chernigov to the Finno-Ugric Zalesye were fragmented.

    This was written by the famous Russian historian Lubavsky.

    He proved that the Slavs crashed into the Finno-Ugric Sea of ​​Central Russia in small islands.

    Naturally, the Slavs could not radically influence Finno-Ugric reality.

    Lubavsky writes that in the 14-16 st. on the main territory of the Moscow state abound non-Russian names of settlements (volosts and camps), independent, not taken from rivers, lakes and other tracts.

    But the time of the ethnogenesis of the Russian people seemed to have passed long ago.

    And actually Russian culture is a Finno-Ugric culture.

    This can be read from Prince Trubetskoy.

    Trubetskoy N. S. On the problem of Russian self-knowledge.
  36. avreli
    avreli 8 July 2011 17: 50 New
    • 2
    • 0
    +2
    Vasya, "Ukrainian" you are our beloved.
    I, as a third "crest" allow myself to speak out of the Russian community.
    1. Do not touch Sivertsev - Northerners, most of them in Russia.
    2. The Drevlyans of the glades hated from time immemorial, for which they broke Igor. smile
    3. Streets (the current inhabitants of Odessa), Volhynians, Tivertsy and White Croats - you can leave yourself. But will they agree?
    4. And "ukram" should stop trading in girls - you have been bleeding the nation from the XNUMXth century.
    5. In general, Kiev is not yours. "Moskalsky", and Novogorodsky princes competed for him for centuries since the XIth.
    So Yura Dolgoruky rested in a laurel.
  37. Vasya
    Vasya 8 July 2011 18: 25 New
    • -1
    • 0
    -1
    dimitriy today, 17:17

    and where is the answer? where is at least one mention of a Ukrainian? Maybe because the first mention of Ukraine pops up only in the nineteenth century? Why did you get the idea that Ruthenian is Ukrainian, not Belarusian, Russian, or maybe Moldovan at all? Only on a territorial basis? Do not fool us. We are one people, well, probably except Vasi from Lviv - he is from another planet.


    The first mention of Russia as Ukraine is in the Itatiev Chronicle.
    1187 year. And then constantly.


    The name "Ukraine" for Russia, for the Rusyns was its own, native, well known throughout history.

    So the renaming of Rusyns to Ukrainians in the 19th century. went fine.

    Rusin is a Ukrainian.

    With 9 tbsp. 17 tbsp. there are thousands of documents, political, legal, church, that say that in the Russo-Litovsk era, and in the Cossack era the national territory of Ukraine was called Rus, and its people were Rusyns.

    This is confirmed by such documents of those times: annals, chronicles, memoirs, acts of land, privileges, wills, books of records of the Lithuanian metric, Ruska metric, etc.

    Smotrytsky wrote in the 17th century: "It is not faith that makes Rusin a Rusyn, a Pole a Pole, Litvin a Litvin, but birth and blood are Ruska, Polish and Lithuanian."

    Ivan Vyshensky signed "Ioan Rusin Vyshensky".

    Etc.

    By the way, Litvin is a Belarusian. Belarus then is Lithuania.
    1. Eric
      Eric 8 July 2011 18: 46 New
      • 1
      • 0
      +1
      Ahh, Lithuanian metric ... You indicate at least one normative act! Well, for example, Zemsky reform, or a criminal judge what thread.
  38. Vasya
    Vasya 8 July 2011 18: 50 New
    • -1
    • 0
    -1
    avreli Today, 17:50

    Vasya, "Ukrainian" you are our beloved.
    I, as a third "crest" allow myself to speak out of the Russian community.
    1. Do not touch Sivertsev - Northerners, most of them in Russia.
    2. The Drevlyans of the glades hated from ancient times, for which they broke Igor. smile
    3. Streets (the current inhabitants of Odessa), Volhynians, Tivertsy and White Croats - you can leave yourself. But will they agree?
    4. And "ukram" should stop trading in girls - you have been bleeding the nation from the XNUMXth century.
    5. In general, Kiev is not yours. "Moskalsky", and Novogorodsky princes competed for him for centuries since the XIth.
    So Yura Dolgoruky rested in a laurel.


    As for siveryan.
    Is Chernigov really in Russia? Is Novgorod-Siversky really in Russia?

    And Sloboda - Kursk, Voronezh, Belgorod, Oryol, Starodubshchina (Bryansk) - these are Ukrainian lands that after the revolution went to Russia.

    In the USSR, Soviet anthropologists established the complete anthropological identity of the population of Kursk-Voronezh with the population of Central Ukraine - the middle Dnieper.

    So the Siverians are Ukrainians, Ukrainian lands in Russia.

    Farther.

    Conflicts in Russia - this is not news. Is this a historical discovery?
    No one argues that there were strife.

    Then, in general, Chernihiv was a grave competitor to Kiev.

    Streets, tivertsy, white Croats - these are in the past the closest possible relatives of glades, drevlyans, siveryans.

    Who to share? One family?

    There has long been no separation. This is one single Ukrainian people.

    Share only in Moscow.

    And Moscow itself carefully erases its differences, screaming from morning till night about the "united Russian people."

    This is called "Byzantineism." "Divide and conquer."

    As for prostitution, this is a phenomenon of any country.

    Prostitution has no national identity. Like corruption.

    Kiev is not ours? ))))

    Is he in the Moscow region?

    Now, if Kiev was there, then you would say that it is yours. ))))

    There was such an anecdotal case in 1996, it seems. Everyone who only knew laughed at him.

    A tourist from Vologda came to Kiev, went, examined the Hagia Sophia.

    And he says: "And how did the hahlys manage to seize our original Russian city of Kiev?" ))))

    Ahhhh! Everyone fell out there!

    This is what the Moscow absurdity and fooling of people bring to.

    About Dolgoruky.
    He is not a Russian leader.

    This is a Ukrainian prince who is known for scandals in his family with his brothers.

    Dolgoruky has nothing to do with Russia, since then Russia was not in nature.
    1. East 9 July 2011 01: 04 New
      • 0
      • 0
      0
      All right, Vasya. Of course I understand your knowledge of history, but I was especially impressed with Kursk, Orel, Bryansk and other cities. If you know the history of Ukraine, then at least share sources, why did the Vyatichi lands suddenly become Ukrainian? Or do Russian historians lie in this regard?
      As for your other historical and linguistic research - after the weekend, God forbid, and talk.
      And about Dolgoruky - of course he is a true Ukrainian, he founded Moscow according to the historical tradition, and therefore Moscow belongs to all of Ukraine, or Moscow to Ukraine - of your choice.
  39. Vasya
    Vasya 8 July 2011 18: 53 New
    • -1
    • 0
    -1
    avreli Today, 17:50

    Vasya, "Ukrainian" you are our beloved.
    I, as a third "crest" allow myself to speak out of the Russian community.
    1. Do not touch Sivertsev - Northerners, most of them in Russia.
    2. The Drevlyans of the glades hated from ancient times, for which they broke Igor. smile
    3. Streets (the current inhabitants of Odessa), Volhynians, Tivertsy and White Croats - you can leave yourself. But will they agree?
    4. And "ukram" should stop trading in girls - you have been bleeding the nation from the XNUMXth century.
    5. In general, Kiev is not yours. "Moskalsky", and Novogorodsky princes competed for him for centuries since the XIth.
    So Yura Dolgoruky rested in a laurel.


    Read more.

    In general, this is arrogance.

    Released from the bowels of the Golden Horde, a by-product of the Muscovy political party - claims to the Kiev legacy!

    And on what basis?

    Only on the fact that Muscovy self-proclaimed itself Russia in 1721?

    This is any rogue from the street, can change his name to yours, avreliand claim your apartment, stating that he is yours "the original older brother from the same family".
  40. Fedor 8 July 2011 18: 58 New
    • 1
    • 0
    +1
    Here the public, complexing from its inferiority, is trying to prove something, such as the fact that as soon as a number of Finno-Ugric tribes were dissolved in the mass of Slavic tribes and Russified, because of this, the Russians can not be considered these same Russians, etc. etc. Let me remind the uneducated of a number of unpleasant things for their Svidomo consciousness. The process of mixing tribes and peoples has been going on continuously from the moment the tribes and peoples arose. Consider this phenomenon on the example of the current inhabitants of the territory that previously belonged to Kievan Rus. I must say right away that all the facts I have cited are strictly scientific conclusions. Proven and proven. And if someone did not know this, this is his problem. Although of course these facts were not advertised either in tsarist or in Soviet times. So, let's begin.
    1. Ukrainian surnames on “O” are Polovtsian surnames, because these are Polovtsian suffixes and endings.
    2. Ukrainian surnames on "UK" and "UK" are the names of the Pechenegs, because these are Pecheneg suffixes and endings.
    3. Ukrainian surnames on "YAN" are Gagauz surnames, because these are Gagauzian suffixes and endings.
    Thus, 3/4 of Ukrainians bear the names of Turkic-Tatar origin.
    In the meantime, I remind lovers of purity of blood that the city of Cherkasy (the core of Ukraine, by the way) is named after the name of the autochthonous people living there - the Circassian. I will also add that the following autochthonous peoples lived in the territory of modern Ukraine since the pre-Mongol period - Torques (i.e., Türks), Berendeys, Pechenegs, Polovtsy, black hoods (i.e. Kara-Kalpaki), etc. You can list for a long time, all of them were tribes of Turkic origin and EVERYTHING, I emphasize especially for lovers of purity of blood - ALL of them were safely dissolved in the current Ukrainian people. If someone believes that mixing with the Türks is better than mixing with the Finno-Ugric peoples, then I bet. Having taken the same position as the self-proclaimed Aryans, I affirm that mixing with the Finno-Ugric peoples is better for the simple reason that the Finno-Ugrians are white Caucasians. And I’ll inform you in my hymn that they’re telling the Cossack family that the self-designation of the Cossacks as a professional military caste came from the self-designation of the people who lived in that place, the autochthon — the Kazakhs (their country is called Kazakhstan).
    You can find a lot of interesting things on the Internet, well, for example: http://vlalut.narod.ru/13.html
  41. Vasya
    Vasya 8 July 2011 19: 01 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    Banshee Today, 17: 42

    I did not read Fomenka and Nosovsky.

    All that I write is according to Russian sources.

    Just remove the fake pseudo-historical terms - and everything falls into place.

    Instead of Karamzin "Kievan Rus" - just Russia.

    Instead of the "old Russian nationality", incomprehensible "Rusich" - Rusyns.

    Instead of "Russian princes" - Russian princes.

    And away from any speculations Karamzin and Pogodin type "Moscow Rus", "Novgorod Russia", "Suzdal Russia", "Vladimir Russia", "North-Eastern Russia".

    Such states were never in history!

    Not a single historical document has such names!

    That's it.
  42. Vasya
    Vasya 8 July 2011 19: 13 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    Fedor Today, 18:58

    Stupidity.

    Firstly, it is about Russia, not Ukraine. And you translate the topic. This is called manipulation.

    Secondly, not new.

    Even before the revolution, the Ukrainians and chauvinists of the Black Hundreds tried to "prove" that there was no Ukrainian people, but there was a rabble of unknown origin.

    And this text wanders in the internet one to one. I have seen him more than once.

    He proceeds from the version that the Ukrainians, whom Muscovy used to call "Cherkasy," seem to come from either the Tatars or the Circassians.

    A clear explanation for this has not yet been found.

    Circassians - this is one of the versions, unproven.

    In general, Muscovy called Cherkasy Ukrainians, and this suggests that the Muscovites had no idea what kind of people live in Russia, Ukraine, Moscow was a stranger to Russia.

    Who invented this in Muscovy is unknown and lost in history.

    There is a more serious argument in this matter - anthropology, and not the fabrications of medieval Muscovy. There were plenty of anthropological expeditions in the USSR, and the question was clarified to the maximum.

    Ukrainians are Slavs. Moreover, more homogeneous than, for example, the French, or Germans, or Italians.

    Impurities in the Ukrainians are of course.
    These are ancient Iranian impurities. Scythians and Sarmatians.

    As well as the Scandinavians.

    The remaining impurities are insignificant and reional.

    But the Russians are wow! It’s too old to climb, as everything is mixed up there.

    It depends on which region of Russia.

    Central Russia - Finno-Ugric of course.

    But it normal.

    There are no unworthy peoples.
  43. Vasya
    Vasya 8 July 2011 20: 54 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    KonstantM Today, 17:20

    Vasya ... In the 19th century, closer to the end of the century, the Rusyns were renamed into Ukrainians ...

    Rather, they were renamed malorosov, Ukrainians already at the advice.


    Well no. Malorosov was invented by Peter the Great.

    This is a Byzantine church term.

    Naturally, the “little deer” was rejected by the Ukrainians, and this term disappeared.

    And the renaming of Rusyns into Ukrainians is the second half - the end of the 19th century.
  44. pav
    pav 8 July 2011 22: 47 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    Vasya is beautiful! I respect
    1. mr.Alphonse
      mr.Alphonse 9 July 2011 18: 59 New
      • 0
      • 0
      0
      Bob in anger, wrote here, no one reads.
  45. spirit 9 July 2011 02: 54 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    at the expense of the golden horde !!! And who, then, in 1387 did Timur persecute ??? Khan Tokhtamysh to whom he helped to break through to power so that he would shield him from the white horde and cover his borders. and he betrayed him, for which he paid, ,,,, the horde was rich, so he plundered it, but did not go to Russia because the poor was ...
  46. Vasya
    Vasya 9 July 2011 03: 12 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    spirit Today, 02:54

    Yes. Naturally, the capital of the Horde, Sarai and the court areas were rich.

    And the northern part of the Golden Horde - Zalesye, was poor.

    Yes, and they are far away.

    And the truth is that Tamerlan, his military operations undermined the Golden Horde.
    And the strife finally destroyed her.

    Although, the decline of the Golden Horde gave way to the rise of the Crimean Khanate and the Giree dynasty.

    Instead of Sarai, Bakhchisaray became the leader.
  47. Vasya
    Vasya 9 July 2011 03: 38 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    Lightforcer Yesterday, 17:26

    Vasisualiy, and what kind of continuity can Kievan Rus and Ukrainians be talking about? You do not have a relationship with her. (at least direct). Your language has little in common with Old Russian, look carefully, 70% of the words are taken from Polish. As for the name of the months, as a rule, all knowledge in the language ends there. By God it’s funny, you are far from the first Ukrainian who writes such things. You are so formulaic and predictable. Feeling brainwashing. I am interested in languages, so it’s ridiculous for me to read statements about Old Ukrainian and Old Bulgarian. The linguist will generally break such sayings to pieces. Rusky by the way - Ukrainism, nowhere and never have the inhabitants of Russia been called so, but it is funny that the inhabitants of the Moscow principality call themselves Rusyns in ancient writings. What is not surprising, the people in Russia alone.


    Ukraine and Ukrainians are not related to Russia?
    They have, uncle, have.

    The geographic coordinates are the same.
    The people are the same.
    The language is the same.
    The way of life is the same.

    If this is the same, then why are you saying that it is OTHER?

    Now, if Russia was on the Indigirka River, then you would give us claims.

    But Russia was on the Dnieper River and generally in the territory from the Carpathians to Kursk.
    There we are.

    Farther.
    "Old Russian" language does not exist.
    Russian language of recent origin, from the 17th Art.

    If 17 tbsp. is "ancient", then you have strange ideas about antiquity.

    Russian is young, and it just really does not have ancient forms.

    Farther.
    In Ukrainian, 70% of Polish words?
    Only Polish in Ukraine is almost not understood by anyone.

    Strange. You are a specialist in linguistics.

    The closest to the Ukrainian language is not Polish, but Belarusian. 82% of the total vocabulary.
    Here is the Belarusian language understood by Ukrainians without learning.
    "Having mowed Yas stables, looking at the divine" - this is almost Ukrainian.

    Regarding the Polish coincidences in the Ukrainian language, this is not serious.

    Such coincidences are found in other Slavic languages. Czech, Slovak, Serbian, Croatian, Macedonian.

    This suggests that the Ukrainian language, and Belarusian as well, are languages ​​with a deep old connection with all Slavic languages.

    Farther.
    In the Moscow principality met Rusyns. As guests. I do not argue. Units.

    And Ukraine is a whole country of Rusyns.
  48. Vasya
    Vasya 9 July 2011 04: 03 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    Ost Today, 01:04 AM

    All right, Vasya. Of course I understand your knowledge of history, but I was especially impressed with Kursk, Orel, Bryansk and other cities. If you know the history of Ukraine, then at least share sources, why did the Vyatichi lands suddenly become Ukrainian? Or do Russian historians lie in this regard?
    As for your other historical and linguistic research - after the weekend, God forbid, and talk.
    And about Dolgoruky - of course he is a true Ukrainian, he founded Moscow according to the historical tradition, and therefore Moscow belongs to all of Ukraine, or Moscow to Ukraine - of your choice.


    Earth Vyatichi?

    Well, Vyatichi has long been gone. They resolved among the Finno-Ugric peoples.
    Even mention of them does not exist.
    There is nothing by which they could be distinguished and identified.

    How can there be someone's land, who is not?

    Kursk, Voronezh is the land of the Siverian, part of the Ukrainian people.

    About Dolgoruky.
    Most likely, he did not establish Moscow.

    The official circles of Russia took data from a dubious and unverified source as the beginning of Moscow.

    Karamzin found this insert in the annals, so to speak, "wonderful."

    And this is when Catherine the Second actively rewrote history. Burned the originals of the annals and "made" copies.

    Specific information about Moscow is 1272. Under Khan Mengu-Timur. Census of the Suzdal population.

    In the census of 1252, the village of Moscow is absent.

    About Dolgoruky.

    There was no inheritance for him in Russia, and he could not take the southern lands, everything was taken apart.

    So he wandered into the Finno-Ugric northeast, to take the worst lands for himself.

    In general, the Rurik family was large and branched.

    Yuri Dolgoruky was the youngest Monomakhovich.

    And there were Olgovichi, etc.

    Dolgoruky did not have any dynastic rights.
    And his descendants too.

    And in order to own Russia, Kiev - it was generally unheard of.
    Not that Kiev, neither Chernigov, nor Veliky Novgorod, nothing.

    The descendants of Yuri Dolgoruky began to rule the principalities only with the filing of khans.

    Regarding this, Konstantin Ostrogsky was indignant.
    He was from the Rurikovich clan and had much more rights to own Zalesye, Moscow, etc.
    1. East 9 July 2011 10: 41 New
      • 0
      • 0
      0
      No mention of Vyatich? My friend you do not know the story at all. Have you been to the Oryol Museum of Local Lore? And say it there. It certainly is good to say categorically no and never was. Reminds historian Suvorov.
      About the Finno-Ugric peoples. Yes, such a group of tribes was and is, but Slavic tribes forced them to the north, and not vice versa. Otherwise, we would not speak Russian, but Hungarian, for example.
      Further, this is how to understand your maxim like - Siveryans, Krivichi and other parts of some people there, it does not matter Russian or Ukrainian? I understand that such a tribe was part of the Slavs living in the territory of modern Ukraine, Russia, Belarus or Poland.
      And in general, a beautiful substitution of the Slavic people, for Ukrainians or Russians. Moreover, find out which of them is older. By historical standards, that the Poles, that the Russians or the Belarusians are twin brothers, though someone has become more cool than everyone else.
  49. Rusyn
    Rusyn 9 July 2011 05: 45 New
    • -1
    • 0
    -1
    1. Ukrainian surnames on “O” are Polovtsian surnames, because these are Polovtsian suffixes and endings.
    2. Ukrainian surnames on "UK" and "UK" are the names of the Pechenegs, because these are Pecheneg suffixes and endings.
    3. Ukrainian surnames on "YAN" are Gagauz surnames, because these are Gagauzian suffixes and endings.
    ------------
    Bu-ha-ha-ha .... Muscovite nonsense, Muscovites are completely crazy. Interestingly, the Indo-European surnames of Romanians and Moldavians such as Ceauses + ku (ko) and Popes + ku (ko) are also non-Indo-European? Muscovites need to learn Slavic languages, and then complete nonsense in the brain after the yoke of the Mungal formed. Now they will begin to declare the most ancient Slavic vocabulary such as "ruh" or "ganba" by Turkisms. Well, this is due to a lack of intelligence and stupidity due to isolation from the Slavs as such and the glut of the Muscovite language with Bulgarianisms, as a result of which the perception of other Slavic languages ​​as such was dulled.
    The Ukrainian language is the only Russian language. In it today where from 1% -3% to 5% percent of polonisms, depending on the texts, for comparison in the Muscovite language, only Bulgarianisms with the same calculation method will be from 15% -20% to 40% -60% !!!
    Here is a quote from "Words on the shelf"

    And my ty smoke
    Svidomi Kmeti

    Everything is clear to any "Svidomo": "but my inhabitants of Kursk are famous, skilled, conscious people, peasants, etc." For Muscovites, the perception of this text will cause difficulties.

    So Svidomo Kmeti (from Ukrainian, mean-spirited, i.e. smart, masterful. Kmet is an intelligent man, peasant, warrior, man) already lived in our Ukrainian (Istornorisk) Kursk. Residents of both Russia and Kursk were "Svidomo", i.e. Rusyns-Ukrainians. And then there was 1933 and Kursk and Kuban and Starodub were torn from the mother of Rus-Ukraine.

    And there are thousands of such examples !!!
  50. Vasya
    Vasya 9 July 2011 09: 59 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    Rusin Today, 05:45

    Yes.