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

239
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.
239 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. +1
    9 July 2011 23: 46
    And if you pay Vasya even more, then you will easily discover that the direct ancestors of Ukrainians are Atlanteans, especially from western Ukraine.
    1. slan
      +1
      9 July 2011 23: 55
      But no, take it higher - from Venus. Bayan already.. Type in Google, they have published such books in all seriousness, soon they will start teaching at school along with other pearls.
  2. +1
    10 July 2011 00: 24
    Vasya, you are probably a good guy, but in this situation, it is worth noting that it would be ugly (at least) to ask for help from “Muscovy” for people like you (Vasya), when someone else starts calling the others “untermensch” again. .
  3. Vasya
    0
    10 July 2011 00: 31
    DAGESTANIAN333 Today, 00:24

    Do we really ask?

    No, Moscow itself is asking.

    Go either to the “Customs Union” or to the “Common Economic Space”.
    They also invited me to the “Russian world”.

    Nobody wants that, guess what.

    The Belarusians foolishly entered into an alliance with Russia, and what are they now?
    There, you know where.
  4. consul
    0
    10 July 2011 01: 00
    You are the Finno-Ugrians. You are them.
    This is felt at the genetic level.

    But if a Dagestani, for example, or an Ingush or a Georgian comes, oh, the attitude here is completely different.

    Everyone has already understood what and where you feel. You communicate like sectarians, in circles (and it doesn’t matter what arguments they give). And you forget yourself, speaking derogatorily about the glorious Finno-Ugric peoples, who are together with us - Russians, and so Russians living on the outskirts and other nationalities of Russia shed their blood for their Fatherland. And we don’t give a damn about your opinion, Shelukhin and others like you.
  5. +1
    10 July 2011 01: 08
    Vasya, to begin with, no matter how much you would like, Russians - they will call the nation that lives in modern Russia, and just because you post kilometers of comments here, the situation will not change, you will remain Ukrainians, and your state is only 20 years old.
    In the modern world there are only two centers (if we take it essentially), these are Moscow and London. The fate of other peoples and states lies in worthy coexistence with these centers, i.e. not to run back and forth when one of them weakens, but to choose the path, once and for all, and die there if necessary.

    This is my logic...Vasya.
    1. 0
      10 July 2011 01: 41
      London lol?
  6. S.N.M.
    0
    10 July 2011 01: 32
    I ask you not to touch anyone for our “Russianness”.
    We accept yours as dissolution for our betrayal.
    but our CASE is RIGHT and the enemy will be defeated no matter what.
    Judge not, but fear Us.
  7. Vasya
    0
    10 July 2011 11: 50
    consul Today, 01:00

    This means that I did not receive a clear answer.

    Nobody knows why Russians are called only by an adjective.

    How strange!

    About themselves, and they don’t know anything.

    By the way, where did I write disrespectfully about the Finno-Ugric peoples?

    Regarding Shelukhin.
    What is he wrong about?

    Ukraine is the largest country that is entirely located in Europe.

    Ukraine is larger than France, larger than Spain, larger than Germany, larger than Poland.

    The size of Ukraine is quite comparable to the size of Central Russia.

    And how is Ukraine a border territory? ))))
    1. +1
      10 July 2011 12: 11
      It doesn’t matter anymore Vasya, the points of view are defined.

      Ask the whole world, hear what they call your nation.
    2. Eric
      0
      13 July 2011 10: 49
      Yeah, and in Ukraine people die this way, but in Germany there are about 90 million people living! :) And how many are left in Ukraine?
  8. Vasya
    0
    10 July 2011 15: 08
    DAGESTANIAN333 Today, 12:11

    Ask the whole world, hear what they call your nation.


    Why do you undertake to teach everyone around you if you know nothing about yourself?

    Your knowledge about yourself is the myths that your rulers created for you.
    1. slan
      0
      10 July 2011 15: 23
      Yes, the patient’s period of remission was short-lived..(((
      Vasyatko, everything is fine, calm down. Karamzin and Ekaterina burned both books in Ukrainian and appropriated for themselves the great history of ancient Ukria. The Russian Ugrians don't even have a substantive. The great and proud Ukrainian Frankenstein, who frivolously created this monster from Muscovy-Ugria, turned out to be perspicacious and thus gave a sign to the descendants of the proud Venusian-Atlanteans how to distinguish, using the rules of the Russian language, the true descendants of the land of Krayan from the impostors from the Urals. Vasyatko, how can we make amends to you, tell me? Maybe we will write a collective appeal to Dmitry Anatolyevich on Twitter demanding that the Russian Federation be renamed the Ugric Kaganate? Will this satisfy you? How long?
      p.s. maybe it is necessary to amend the constitution so that Russian Ugric people do twice before wearing orange trousers? You write, Vasyatko, don’t be shy, it’s useful for you to speak out.
    2. 0
      10 July 2011 16: 28
      What about Vasya, the myths created your is it preferred by rulers?
      1. slan
        0
        10 July 2011 17: 02
        There would be myths, or outright nonsense. And in fact, their school textbooks don’t really write much more adequately. There are countless people like Vasyatko there. The Russians also have plenty of fools, Rodnovers, but there it is the state ideology.
        In general, I think that Vasyatko is very helpful in this topic. Looking at him, it’s worth thinking about and not being like idiots. Be proud of your real achievements, and not boast of being chosen by God and superiority over other nations, relying on modern books by the insane with stories about the great ancient Rus, all of whose books were burned and the most majestic ancient buildings were destroyed by envious people. The Russian people are a great people and have absorbed hundreds of other peoples, as well as German, Italian and others. I don’t know why Vasyatko decided that this should be shameful))
        Official Russian history, by the way, is by no means Russophile. The Ruriks are recognized in it as Scandinavians, called upon by the Novgorodians to rule first Novgorod, and then other Eastern European cities, conventionally called Russia. In the surviving chronicles, Rus' is officially recognized as the name of that same Varangian squad, and is by no means the historical self-name of the ancient Russian people. Whether some of the Russians and Ukrainians like it or not, there are no other real historical documents. And to shout that the Ukrainians recorded everything on ancient computers, but Catherine broke them all is the lot of such vasyats.
  9. slan
    0
    10 July 2011 17: 31
    Quote: Vasya
    The Belarusians foolishly entered into an alliance with Russia, and what are they now?
    There, you know where.

    Vasyatko, is it okay that I address you with a Turkic suffix, you sick man? By the way, is sickly a noun or an adjective here, are you our linguist? So, Vasyatko, where the Belarusians are now, you, the wretched one, can only pull out the last hairs on your ass by comparing the indicators of the standard of living of Belarusians, even taking into account the latest devaluation of the Belarusian ruble, and the standard of living of your people. The difference in average and minimum wages, pensions, and the amount of housing commissioned will not be a percentage, but tens of percentages. Even the Kazakhs live better than you. And this is not about oil and gas and Russian assistance. Ukraine is rich in coal and iron ore, and even gas. And he gets a lot of money for the pipe that the Russians recklessly laid there, for Sevastopol and for much else, which, by the way, you will soon run out of. Nord Stream is already being completed and so on. The point is about such nonentities and envious losers who seized power in the so-called Ukraine. By the way, about linguistics. In many Slavic languages, "steal" means the same thing as in Russian. If you don’t know, then this is the same as the Turkic “to poke”. Was it a coincidence that ukrov was called that? Or does religion and medicine not allow you to answer questions? So far you have only answered about two books in Ukrainian, which were burned to the ground by Muscovites))
  10. consul
    0
    10 July 2011 17: 41
    Vasily, all the answers (at least for you) are here:

    http://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%A3%D0%BA%D1%80%D0%B0%D0%B8%D0%BD%D1%86%D1%8B -украинцы;

    http://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%A0%D1%83%D1%81%D1%81%D0%BA%D0%B8%D0%B5 -русские.

    Don’t even bother with the Shelukhins and other authors of the pseudo-history of the land on which you live, as well as those who “figured out” the history of Russia, no one believes them except the Khazarians or Pechenegs like you.
    Russia is 1/6 part of the land and Little Russia, in comparison with it, is just a border territory, especially within the borders of the Russian Empire. Regarding the Finno-Ugrians, there is a link to the Russians. The tone of your comparison with the Caucasians of the F-Ugrians (what did you see there on the genetic level) allowed us to conclude that you have a disrespectful attitude towards these tribes. In addition, the outraged Caucasians got theirs (some may not yet), just like your Sokhazars and Pechenegs who were there, and only the current government in Russia is having difficulty restraining indignation of the people (what will happen when this power disappears?).
    Regarding the baptism of already baptized Little Russians, the key word was - Until now, and not that they were rebaptized (at the same time, I very much doubt that you know the Church Charter).
    Regarding Ivan the Terrible, I just gave an example that Russia was not in isolation. Russia did not need an alien ideology.
    1. slan
      -1
      10 July 2011 17: 52
      Before, I thought that these were Zionists writing under the guise of Ukrainians. Who else could be so interested in hatred and contempt for Ukrainians? But the reality is much harsher. Imagine if the Russians start writing on ukroforums about Great Bulgaria, the Khazar Kaganate, the Golden Horde, calling for ukrov not to appropriate and not to distort at least the Slavic language, but to smoke tyutyun in cradles and walk around their adobe mud huts in Turkish trousers in silence. Yes, the Ukrainians and for some reason accuse the Russians of interfering with their independence, but who needs them? Were you in ukronete? So why don’t you kick them out of here with pissing rags?
  11. consul
    +1
    10 July 2011 18: 18
    slan- Yes, somehow there is no desire to get into the ukrnet, we have a lot more problems in Russia (but I’m very worried about the people there, there are relatives there). I suspect that such keepers of “certain secret knowledge that the Russians don’t know” want to dump this mess on us, thinking that it will impress (except for bitter laughter, it (the porridge) does not cause anything). But you probably won’t be kicked out because of age, in our youth we were all stubborn and, having no experience, tried to prove something. I don’t think they write that Zionists, but they probably came up with the writing (the principle of divide and conquer has not been canceled).
  12. Russian officer
    +2
    10 July 2011 21: 29
    Hello everyone!
    I read the article. Good. I read the comments. And here is Vasya.
    Vasya!
    Don't like Russians? Well, don't like it. We do not instill love for ourselves in anyone. But don’t stop us from talking about the history of the “usurper Muscovy” you don’t like.
    You're in the wrong company.
    And I am proud that I am Russian. Will you hit me? And the roots of one of my branches are in Ukraine. Draw a conclusion. I am Slavic. Are you satisfied?
    Leave the forum.
  13. Alex
    +1
    11 July 2011 02: 13
    Why write comments off topic? Administrator ban Vasya, otherwise people can’t communicate.
    Indeed, the Slavs have a very ancient history, but after Christianization, historical memory was erased in every possible way. And the Slavs had a runic letter. Your own religion. After all, if you think sensibly, what does the Jewish religion have to do with me, a Russian person? I don't care about the Jews themselves.
    But if you can read the Bible, who will explain what is interesting or spiritual in it?
  14. Vasya
    0
    11 July 2011 02: 34
    Russian officer Yesterday, 21:29

    Love-dislike has nothing to do with it.

    I asked you a simple question to get to know yourself.

    There is one uneducated rude guy here.

    They write such nonsense that you think they are either inadequate or dense.

    For example, about 1/6 of the world during the time of Ivan the Terrible.

    Probably descendants of their uneducated ancestors.

    I thought the consul would tell me normally, but he also threw a tantrum.

    One Slav among the Finno-Ugric peoples? Stray.

    I know why everyone was filled with rage.
    Because the khans of the Horde in the 13th century. Russians were called "herd"?
    And I told this here on the forum.

    Read your Sobolevsky. Russian historian.
  15. Vasya
    0
    11 July 2011 02: 38
    Alex Today, 02:13

    Christianity is a world religion, not a Jewish one.

    You shouldn't be doing that. You have to believe in God.
  16. Vasya
    0
    11 July 2011 03: 31
    Russian officer Yesterday, 21:29

    I explain it simply and clearly.

    During her reign, Empress Elizabeth Petrovna ordered three prominent scientists from Germany.
    Germans Miller, Schlozer and Stritter.

    The task they were given was the following. Research and describe the origins of the Russian people.

    The Germans conscientiously completed a huge amount of work, traveled throughout the Russian Empire, read archives, everything they had.

    The conclusion of their enormous research work was as follows.
    Russians are of FINNO-UGRIAN origin.

    There was a big scandal.
    Catherine the Second was furious at the position of Miller and his colleagues.
    She forbade talking about it, and she herself wrote a circular work, where she said that Russia is a country
    "dispersed nations"
    and these are the Slavs.

    Already in the 19th century. Russian historian, professor at St. Petersburg University Konstantin Kavelin again raised the same question.
    He examined the old chronicles and did not find the Russian people there.
    As he wrote. There are Poles, there are Ukrainians, there are Belarusians, there are Finno-Ugric peoples, but there are no Russians. There is no data about them in the chronicles.

    Kavelin traveled around Russia and came to a conclusion. Russians are Finno-Ugrians.

    Then Miliukov proved the same thing.

    Further, the famous and outstanding historian Lyubavsky proved in exactly the same way about the strong predominance of Finno-Ugric people among the Russian people.

    Then Uvarov, having conducted research on expeditions, proved the same thing.
    Russians are Finno-Ugrians.

    Then Barsov, after researching the chronicles, described what a chud is.

    Then Prince Trubetskoy, having conducted research into Russian culture, proved that Russian culture is a Finno-Ugric culture, not a Slavic one, that Russian culture and traditions have fundamental differences from the Slavic one.

    Then Academician Pokrovsky proved that Russians are Finno-Ugrians, and that the maximum Slavic blood in Russians is 20%.

    Even Lomonosov was forced to admit that Finno-Ugrians are present among the Russian people.

    And Klyuchevsky and others, with narpyag, also recognized the Finno-Ugric peoples among the Russians.

    That's the story.

    Until now, official imperial historians of Russia do not have a clear picture of the origin of Russians from the Slavs.

    And genetic swindlers rush around the Ukrainian-Belarusian lands in Russia, such as Smolensk or Kuban, and “prove” the Slavicness of the Russians.

    But in the lands of Central Russia, they have nowhere to go, and they recognize, well, yes, Finno-Ugrians, but not everywhere.

    I personally don’t distinguish Russians from Zyryans at all.
    And I don’t distinguish the Mordvins, although they have a specific appearance, but the Russians have the same one!

    I can tell the Tatars apart, you can see them right away.

    That's all the info. And you have nothing to fear.
    1. 0
      13 July 2011 12: 17
      three prominent scientists.
      Miller, Schlozer and Stritter. They didn’t know how to read the 148 runes of the Family and therefore couldn’t compose anything intelligible
    2. 0
      13 July 2011 21: 38
      Your Fritz didn’t even bother to learn the language, but you say WRITE!!!)))
  17. consul
    0
    11 July 2011 04: 16
    Vasily - Let me explain - when they started talking about Little Russians as Ukrainians, it was the second half of the 19th century (and this is just Russia - 1/6 of the land), before that your brother was called Little Russians. And here I also don’t understand the times of Ivan the Terrible, but Even at that time, relative to Moscow, Little Russians lived on the outskirts (area in square meters does not matter here).

    Because the khans of the Horde in the 13th century. Russians were called "herd"?
    - Believe me, at that time, if they called it that way, then your ancestors were called that way, because there was only one country and Kyiv was one of the first cities destroyed.

    Alex -The Bible is divided into 2 parts - the Old and New Testaments. The first part is mainly a historical narrative + prophecies about the Messiah (Christ in Greek), the second part consists of the Gospels (four) and the letters of the apostles + the Revelation of John the Theologian. That’s just the second part and imbued with spiritual meaning, despite the fact that real events are described there. Essentially the entire Christian teaching is contained there, and for the more convenient salvation of (spiritual) people, the Lord Jesus Christ founded the Church, for which the apostles worked hard; priestly succession in the Orthodox Church comes precisely from the apostles. Why do Jews appear there? Because at that time only they preserved the true teaching about God. If you are interested in the spiritual meaning, just read and reflect. As for Slavic paganism, practically nothing is known about it, due to this that it has become simply unnecessary and has no meaning. For example, the Chuvash have partially preserved paganism and in secret places there are keremets (which is a pillar with some decoration) where they periodically go, and, as I already said back in the 19th century, they had It is customary to bury babies under the gates (well, so that there would be prosperity, etc.). The Russians have nothing left, and the fact that the neo-pagans offer this is from the category of “ukrov songs”.
  18. consul
    0
    11 July 2011 04: 35
    Well, explain what the geneticists were wrong about? The above-mentioned historians didn’t have the equipment they have now, did they? And there was no way they could study DNA, and the researchers did their job without bias. .In the lands of Central Russia there is the Mordovian people, which is divided into two tribes - Erzya and Moksha, living quite compactly. There are also Chuvash (closer to the Volga). But you can’t distinguish every Tatar from your faithful “Ukrainian”, because they are fair-haired and There are blue eyes (remnants of the Bulgarians).
  19. consul
    0
    11 July 2011 04: 56
    Let me add that the Russians settled from one Slavic center, but did not assimilate, but preserved their faith, language, culture, traditions, identity. To understand this, study the Finno-Ugric culture, language, traditions, and compare yours, especially with regard to artistic crafts (drawings, embroidery). The language in this case is very important - if a Russian and a Ukrainian can somehow understand each other, then Mordovian, Karelian, Zyryan or Finnish, neither you nor I will understand anything.
  20. 0
    11 July 2011 10: 23
    ))) VASYA wrote above - a troll!!! Don't feed the troll and he will go away!!!!!)))
  21. Vasya
    0
    11 July 2011 14: 58
    consul Today, 04:16

    About "rayat". Just calm down and read.

    Larin B. A. Parisian dictionary of Muscovites 1586 - Riga, 1948.

    Well, as it were, the beginning of the 14th century. and apply Ukraine to this very thing.

    I do not know.
    Ukraine was not actually the Golden Horde, but a dependent territory.

    Khan Uzbek himself reigned only in 1313.
    He began to introduce Islam and fought the rebellion of the emirs.

    And in 1319, Lithuanian troops were already driving the Tatars out of Ukraine.

    In 1320 Kyiv was liberated and the Tatars were all expelled from Rus'.

    So maybe he wanted to, but didn’t have time.

    And it was necessary to somehow distinguish the non-Muslim population of Zalesye from the Muslims of the Horde. So they began to call it “rayat”, and later “peasants”.

    “The herd” is probably not offensive.
  22. Vasya
    -1
    11 July 2011 15: 02
    SLAVA Today, 10:23

    You alone may not read, but people at least know the truth.

    You better leave the forum.
  23. Vasya
    0
    11 July 2011 15: 25
    consul Today, 04:35

    Regarding genetics.

    If there is a grain and a set of genetic data about them, then we can say. that this is an apple tree, etc.

    And I planted it and the pear grew.

    Confusion? Without a doubt.

    And we are not talking about isolated cases, but when generalizing, it is better to talk about the fruits, and not about the genetic set of possibilities.

    Anthropology allows us to see who was born and how and what we have in fact.
    And genetics shows the possibilities.
    But there is still a lot that is still unclear.

    Moreover, when and where would these large-scale research genetic expeditions in Russia or Ukraine take place?

    It is worth recalling how labor-intensive and expensive this type of work is.
    Who will spend a lot of money on large-scale research? Who will attract such huge opportunities for this?

    And the sampling, well, excuse me. You can walk through gypsy camps and “prove” that the Russians are gypsies.

    And especially if there is an order from the authorities from above for the desired result, then you can go through the Slavs of the Kuban and “prove” the Slavicness of the Russians.

    No, if everything is to be done seriously, it should be large-scale research regarding EVERYONE, like a population census.

    So genetic selected studies, hundreds of people or two, then this is for tens of millions of people - not serious, smacks of an order.

    So we rely on anthropology, where everything has been done seriously and a long time ago.

    When genetics becomes as simple as in the science fiction film "Gattaca", then we will take it into account.

    Regarding the muzzle, Erzi, Moksha, why are there few of them? Because they were written down as “Russians” and left little behind.

    For example, according to the population census in the Russian Empire in 1897, in the Vologda province there were two dominant nationalities. Russians and Zyryans.

    Now there are officially no Zyryans in the Vologda region.
    I ask my friends from Vologda: “Do you have any Zyryans?”
    Answer: "Yes."

    Where did they go from official sources? They are recorded as “Russians”, and that’s it.

    That is why there are so “few” Finno-Ugric people.

    There are quite a few of them, but a sea of ​​them, but Moscow has recorded them all as “Russians.” To eliminate differences in the occupied territories. Usual imperial policy.

    They also decided to call the Ukrainians “Russians”, and so that there was no doubt, the completely thousand-year-old ethnonym “Rusyn” was thrown out of textbooks, as if it never existed.

    This is the lie of the Moscow authorities.
  24. consul
    0
    11 July 2011 23: 12
    So we rely on anthropology, where everything has been done seriously and a long time ago.
    Let's repeat:
    -Anthropology of Ukrainians

    Ukrainians are part of the “Danube” (Norik) group of populations. This also includes Belarusians, Poles, many Russians (among these peoples the Valdai variant of the Danube type, characterized by slightly greater light pigmentation, predominates), Slovenes, some populations of Croats, as well as Germans, Austrians and Lithuanians[58].

    Ukrainians are usually brachycephalic, most of them are tall, with a predominance of dark hair color, but light-eyed people in almost all anthropological types characteristic of Ukrainians (except Dinaric) predominate over dark-eyed ones.

    According to a number of characteristics (facial profile, transverse profile of the bridge of the nose, protrusion of the wings of the nose, position of the nostrils, development of the fold of the upper eyelid), some groups of the population of Ukraine (Middle Dnieper, Left Bank), undoubtedly Caucasoid, have a small percentage of admixture associated with the assimilation of steppe Turkic groups with a certain Mongoloid element.[59].

    Of the anthropological types, the most common are the Gorids, Pontids and Baltids. The Dinaric type is less common (mainly in the southern and western regions).
  25. consul
    0
    11 July 2011 23: 17
    Anthropology of Russians

    According to most anthropological characteristics, Russians occupy a central position among the peoples of Europe[54].

    Russian populations are quite homogeneous in anthropological terms[55]. Average anthropological indicators either coincide with average Western European values ​​or deviate from them, remaining, however, within the fluctuations of Western groups[55].

    The following features can be noted that distinguish Russians from Western European populations[55]:

    Lighter pigmentation. The proportion of light and medium shades of hair and eyes is increased, the proportion of dark shades is reduced;
    Reduced growth of eyebrows and beard;
    Moderate face width;
    The prevalence of medium horizontal profile and medium-high nose;
    A smaller slope of the forehead and a weaker development of the eyebrow.

    The Russian population is characterized by the extremely rare occurrence of epicanthus. Out of more than 8,5 thousand Russian males examined, epicanthus was found only 12 times, and only in its infancy. The same extremely rare occurrence of epicanthus is observed in the population of Germany[56].

    Based on the results of studies of Y-chromosomal markers, two groups of Russian populations are distinguished[57]. In the northern group (Mezen, Pinega, Krasnoborsk) closeness with neighboring Finno-Ugric and Baltic populations was revealed, which may be explained by a common substrate. The south-central group, which includes the vast majority of Russian populations, is included in a common cluster with Belarusians, Ukrainians and Poles[57][58]. According to the results of a study of mtDNA markers, as well as autosomal markers, Russians are similar to other populations of Central and Eastern Europe[58]. High unity in autosomal markers of East Slavic populations and their significant differences from neighboring Finno-Ugric, Turkic and North Caucasian peoples have been revealed [59] [60].

    In Russian populations, there is an extremely low frequency of genetic traits characteristic of Mongoloid populations. The frequencies of East Eurasian markers among Russians correspond to the European average[61].
  26. consul
    0
    11 July 2011 23: 41
    Regarding the muzzle, Erzi, Moksha, why are there few of them? Because they were written down as “Russians” and left little behind.
    No)) there are quite a few Mordovians, and between the tribes there is also a dispute about who is greater than the Mordovians.
    For example, according to the population census in the Russian Empire in 1897, in the Vologda province there were two dominant nationalities. Russians and Zyryans.

    Now there are officially no Zyryans in the Vologda region.
    I ask my friends from Vologda: “Do you have any Zyryans?”
    Answer: "Yes."

    Where did they go from official sources? They are recorded as “Russians”, and that’s it.

    The total number of Komi (Komi, Komi-Zyryans, Zyryans) (Komi-Zyryans together with related Komi-Permyaks, who are mainly settled in the Perm region) in the world reaches approx. 400 thousand people (Zyryans also live in Ukraine, by the way))) The majority of representatives of the Komi people (256 thousand [3]) in the Russian Federation live in the Komi Republic, where they make up 30% (256 thousand) of the total population. Another 60% (607 thousand) are Russians, 2% (62 thousand) are Ukrainians, 1,5% (15,5 thousand) are Tatars, 1,4% (15 thousand) are Belarusians. The majority of the population of the Komi Republic (730 thousand) is urban, another 300 thousand live in villages. It is in rural areas in the Komi Republic that the percentage of the Komi population is greater than in cities.

    In general, about 293 thousand Komi-Zyryans live in Russia [3], in addition, Komi-Zyryans live in small enclaves and mixed in Arkhangelsk, Murmansk, Kirov, Omsk and other regions of the Russian Federation.
  27. Rusyn
    0
    12 July 2011 02: 49
    calling on Ukrov not to appropriate or distort at least the Slavic language, but to smoke tyutyun in cradles and walk around their adobe mud huts in Turkish trousers in silence.
    -----------

    In general, there are elementary things known to everyone.
    1. Tobacco is the same Turkic word as tyutyun. Well, if we’re smoking it in a Turkic cradle, well then forgive me, you actually trade in Turkic money and write with Turkic pencils, and at the same time managed to make some pennies out of Western European hard currency called Grossen... to each his own, some Ukrainian (original Russian) mitnitsa and tavern, others Mungal customs and Mongolian tavern.
    2. Bloomers are IRANISM, if you are at all able to understand the difference between Iranians (Aryans) and Turks. Bloomers are clearly recorded as the clothing of Rus' by Arab chroniclers!!! In the same way, kobza is already recorded in Kievan Rus. It is clear that one should not confuse the origin of a thing and the origin of the name of a thing. Kobza and shish kebab are Turkisms, and lute and alcohol are Arabisms. But are the kobza and lute respectively Turkic or Arabic instruments? I personally do not know any Turks or Arabs who play lutes or kobzas. And is alcohol and shish kebab a folk drink or a dish of the Arabs or Turks??? Alcohol is definitely not an Arab folk drink, but shish kebab is more likely a food of the Ibero-Caucasian peoples, but they are not Turks either!!!
  28. Rusyn
    0
    12 July 2011 02: 50
    calling on Ukrov not to appropriate or distort at least the Slavic language, but to smoke tyutyun in cradles and walk around their adobe mud huts in Turkish trousers in silence.
    ---
    3. A dwelling such as a hut is clearly recorded at least in the 5th-6th century precisely as the dwelling of Iranian-speaking (i.e. Aryan) peoples on the territory of modern Ukraine. Here it is already clear to even a fool that the Turks DO NOT HAVE AND CANNOT HAVE ANY RELATIONSHIP WITH THIS TYPE OF HOUSINGS AT ALL. Later, such dwellings are also clearly archaeologically recorded among the Ulichi, Tivertsy and, possibly, part of the Polyans (Rus), that is, among those Slavic tribes that were in contact with the Iranians - Skolots, Sarmatians, etc. But already a little further north (Volyn, Polesie, Carpathians) we already have log huts. The Vyatichi-Lekhites generally lived in dugouts at this time. So it’s not for their ancestors to judge our Aryan huts.
    4. Regarding “black-browed” and “fair-haired”. There is such a very famous anthropological forum Deniken
    dienekes.blogspot.com
    so there, in a discussion about the genetics of the Slavs, there was such a remark: “It should be noted that in the north-west of Eastern Europe the Slavs, in contrast to the Balts and Finno-Ugric peoples, have darker hair and iris color. It is no coincidence that during the times of Kievan Rus they called the Balts and Finno-Ugrians "white-eyed Chud." Unfortunately, the page at this link no longer seems to exist.
    dienekes.blogspot.com/2005/04/hair-color-of-proto-slavs-revisited.html

    posted? by Dienekes on Saturday, April 09, 2005

    but whoever needs it will find it. Thus, the taller “black-browed” Rusyn-Ukrainians (although of course there are also fair-haired ones) turn out to be more similar to the Slavs than the fair-haired, short-legged, snub-nosed and high-cheeked Muscovites. Isn’t it all because of the white-eyed miracle among the Muscovites??? Although, of course, I understand that Muscovites in some southern regions can probably be even darker than the Rusyn-Ukrainians.
  29. Rusyn
    0
    12 July 2011 03: 04
    calling on Ukrov not to appropriate or distort at least the Slavic language
    -----------------
    To be honest, I am a person who knows Ukrainian (true Russian), Belarusian (I read and understand), Muscovite (pseudo-Russian), Polish (I can read, but if they speak quickly, I don’t understand). I also “know” in general terms in Czech and Slovak. To be honest, a more “distorted” language than the language in which I am writing all this, i.e. I don’t know a more “distorted” language than the Muscovite language!!! What is touching is the stupidly naive belief of the Muscovites in the “originality” of their language. What the Ukrainian (true Russian) and Belarusian languages ​​were already in the 16-17th century, the Muscovite language was only able to achieve in the post-Petrine era, and even then, for the sake of this, the Muscovites closed all higher and secondary educational institutions (academies, schools and colleges) in Rus'-Ukraine and Lithuania (White Rus') and also burned more than one hundredweight of ancient manuscripts in “Southern Russian” i.e. True Russian church and book languages, and these languages ​​themselves were soon simply banned.
  30. Vasya
    0
    12 July 2011 12: 12
    Rusin Today, 03:04

    Yes. I agree.

    The Russian language is of recent origin, and logically it does not have pronounced dialectal forms. Dialects have not yet appeared in the Russian language.

    But all other Slavic languages ​​are old languages ​​and they have plenty of dialect forms.
    Dukhninsky wrote about this, but he is naturally not an authority for Russians. Although the weight of the arguments is important, not nationality or political views.

    But Russian linguists have established a specific connection between the Russian language and the Finno-Ugric language environment. These are Serebrennikov, Lytkin, Kuznetsov, Chelishchev.
    Lytkin has a wonderful work Lytkin V.I. Finno-Ugric borrowings in the Russian language // Russian speech. - 1972. - No. 3.

    And the linguist Levi developed the theory of the Finno-Ugric basis of the Russian language.

    And now we can read in the journal “Questions of Linguistics”, No. 5, p. 67 for 1957, an article by Academician Trubachev.

    He, analyzing the 4-volume etymological dictionary of Vasmer, established on the basis of 10779 words that among them:
    - late borrowings - 6304 (58,5% of words) - half of the Russian language.
    - common Slavic words (and early borrowings) - 3191 (29,5% of words).
    - Russian words - 93 (0,9% of words).
    - East Slavic - 72 (0,8%).

    So we conclude what Russian language is. How “originally Slavic” he is, what “Slavic local origin” he is.

    This is not surprising. These 29,5% of Slavic borrowings are Ukrainian borrowings.

    16-17 Art. - massive infusion of Ukrainian into the Moscow language.
    18th century - a powerful German infusion into the Russian language.
    19th century - French influences.

    For comparison, the Ukrainian language has preserved its vocabulary to a much greater extent.

    And as the brilliant linguist, linguist, orientalist academician Agafangel of Crimea (speaking 60 languages) established, in princely Rus', outside the official Church Slavonic in church services and correspondence, the people of Rus' spoke Ukrainian.
    There is corresponding work by Krymsky.
  31. Vasya
    0
    12 July 2011 12: 21
    consul Yesterday, 23:41

    I’m not saying that there are no Zyryans in Komi or other regions of Russia.

    I gave the example of Vologda and the Vologda region.

    There were Zyryans there too, and quite a few! This can be seen from the population census in the Russian Empire.

    Now there are no Zyryans officially in Vologda.
    They recorded anyone there, even the smallest ethnic groups.

    The question is, did they evaporate into thin air?

    No. The same thing happened to them as to the Ukrainians of Kuban.

    They were recorded as Russian.

    And after looking at photographs of Zyryans, I, for example, cannot distinguish them at all in appearance from the population of Vologda.

    Regarding Ukrainians with brunettes.
    Don’t you know that the majority of Slavs are brunettes?

    Ukrainians are mid-southern Caucasians.
    Not as dark as, for example, Bulgarians or Macedonians, but that’s okay.

    And what is the secret, and Rusin wrote about this, that Finno-Ugrians are fair-haired?
    Although that’s right, they also have dark ones.
  32. consul
    0
    12 July 2011 13: 08
    In the XNUMXth - early XNUMXth centuries, the majority of Komi lived in the Yarensky and Ust-Sysolsky districts, which were part of the Vologda province, as well as in the Pechora district of the Arkhangelsk province.

    In 1921, the Autonomous Region of Komi was created. In 1936 it was transformed into the Komi ASSR (since 1991 the Komi SSR, since 1992 - the Komi Republic).
    - live forever, learn forever. That’s why not.
    In the same Novgorod Land, where supposedly only Finnish tribes lived from ancient times, the famous philologist R.A. Ageeva points to hydronyms of the Indo-European type, and primarily in the Southern Ilmen region, where Slavic Rus' or Rusa was later recorded.
  33. consul
    +1
    12 July 2011 13: 17
    This is what the Indian professor D.P. wrote. Shastri
    If you were to ask me which two languages ​​of the world are most similar to each other, I would answer without any hesitation: “Russian and Sanskrit.” And not because some words in both these languages ​​are similar, as is the case with many languages ​​belonging to the same family. For example, common words can be found in Latin, German, Sanskrit, Persian, and Russian, which belong to the Indo-European group of languages. What is surprising is that our two languages ​​have similar word structures, style and syntax. Let us add even greater similarity in the rules of grammar - this arouses deep curiosity among everyone who is familiar with linguistics, who wants to know more about the close ties established in the distant past between the peoples of the USSR and India.

    Universal word

    Let's take for example the most famous Russian word of our century, “sputnik”. It consists of three parts: a) “s” is a prefix, b) “put” is a root and c) “nik” is a suffix. The Russian word “put” is common to many other languages ​​of the Indo-European family: “path” in English and “path” in Sanskrit. That's all. The similarity between Russian and Sanskrit goes further and is visible at all levels. The Sanskrit word "pathik" means "one who follows the path, a traveler." The Russian language can form words such as “putik” and “traveler”. The most interesting thing in the history of the word “sputnik” in Russian is that in both Sanskrit and Russian, the prefix “sa” and “s” are added and in this way the word “sapatnik” in Sanskrit and “sputnik” in Russian were obtained. The semantic meaning of these words in both languages ​​is the same: “one who follows the path with someone.” I can only congratulate the Soviet people who chose such an international and universal word.
    When I was in Moscow, at the hotel they gave me the keys to room 234 and said “dwesti tridtsat chetire”. In bewilderment, I could not understand whether I was standing in front of a nice girl in Moscow or whether I was in Benares or Ujjain in our classical period some 2000 years ago. In Sanskrit 234 it will be “dwishata tridasa chatwari”. Is there a greater similarity possible anywhere? There are hardly any other two different languages ​​that have preserved their ancient heritage - such similar pronunciation - to this day.
  34. consul
    0
    12 July 2011 13: 18
    Continued:
    I had the opportunity to visit the village of Kachalovo, about 25 km from Moscow, and was invited to dinner by a Russian peasant family. An elderly woman introduced me to the young couple, saying in Russian: “On tou seen i opa moya snokha.”
    How I wish that Panini, the great Indian grammarian who lived about 2600 years ago, could be here dreaming and hear the language of his time, so wonderfully preserved with all the minutest subtleties! The Russian word "seen" is "dol" in English and "soonu" in Sanskrit. Also, “madiy” in Sanskrit can be compared with “tou” in Russian and “my” in English. But only in Russian and Sanskrit "tou" and "madiy" should change into "toua" and "madiya", since we are talking about the word "snokha", which is feminine. The Russian word "snokha" is the Sanskrit "snukha", which can be pronounced the same way as in Russian. The relationship between a son and his son's wife is also described by similar words in the two languages.

    Exactly

    Here is another Russian expression: “That is your dom, etot our dom.” In Sanskrit: “Tat vas dam, etat nas dam.” "Tot" or "tat" is a singular demonstrative pronoun in both languages ​​and refers to an object from the outside. The Sanskrit "dham" is the Russian "dom", perhaps due to the fact that Russian lacks the aspirated "h".
    Young languages ​​of the Indo-European group, such as English, French, German and even Hindi, which directly goes back to Sanskrit, must use the verb “is”, without which the above sentence cannot exist in any of these languages. Only Russian and Sanskrit dispense with the linking verb “is,” while remaining completely correct both grammatically and idiomatically. The word “is” itself is similar to “est” in Russian and “asti” in Sanskrit. And even more than that, the Russian “estestvo” and the Sanskrit “astitva” mean “existence” in both languages. Thus, it becomes clear that not only the syntax and word order are similar, but the very expressiveness and spirit are preserved in these languages ​​in an unchanged original form.
    So how old is the Russian language there?)))
  35. consul
    0
    12 July 2011 13: 31
    Here are some more Russian-Sanskrit words:
    Mother - mata, matri
    Foremother - foremother
    tata - tata
    uncle - dada
    brother-in-law - devar
    son - suni
    daughter-in-law - snusha
    brother-in-law - matchmaker
    father-in-law - svakar
    maiden - devi
    first - purva
    two, two, two - two, two, two
    three - three
    three - trika
    four - chatur, four - chatvara
    water - vada
    meat - ma(n)sa
    firewood - firewood
    dew - race
    sky, heaven - nabha, nabhasa
    house - lady
    space – prastara (prastir)
    smoke - dhum
    darkness - tama (s)
    grass - trin (language loop: “tryn-grass”)
    dog - kuta (from “kutenok”)
    goat - bukka (loop: “buka” - stubborn, gloomy)
    give - yes
    sit - garden
    stand - stha
    love - love
    fall - fall
    graze - plow
    know - know
    dry - sushi
    wake up - budh
    destroy - ruin
    oven - pach
    float - float
    swim across - swim across
    sail away - sail away
    swim - plavlu
    set sail - utchal
    pass - parade
    yours - sva
    yours - yours
    us - us
    you - you
    to you - to you
    this and that
    that - tat (tad)
    this - stage
    those - those
    which is katara
    when - when
    then - then
    always - garden
    young - yuni
    new - nava
    bad - stupid
    ardent - ardent
    dry - sukha
    sun - surya (antimony - red)
    fire - agni
    knowledge - Vedas (to know)
    translate the same words into your Ukrainian, or is this an Indo-Russian conspiracy?))
    1. 0
      13 July 2011 11: 52
      Well done!!! I sincerely thank all those who managed to preserve and pass on to their descendants the root of the origin of our generations carried by people who know God and know the truth
  36. Superduck
    0
    12 July 2011 14: 26
    Holy shit, they're all Nazis, and these people also taught me how to wipe myself with a burdock and told me about the Russian world, booeeee!
  37. dimitriy
    0
    12 July 2011 16: 47
    This is where Vaska’s legs grow from: http://www.regnum.ru/news/polit/1423718.html
    Is it clear how everything is running? Our Jews say that Russians are extinct, and in Ukraine, that Russians are not Russians, but Ukrainians. But both of them agree on one thing - Russia must disintegrate! They don't even consider another option. Draw conclusions SLAVS!
  38. Vasya
    0
    13 July 2011 09: 21
    consul Yesterday, 13:08

    Well, let’s say we can accept the Zyryans in the Vologda province.

    Although the Vologda region is geographically far removed from Komi, this can be checked regarding how the province transformed into a region.

    I'll take a look at this.

    And regarding Veliky Novgorod, who can argue that the Slovenians are Eastern Slavs? Nobody argues.

    Having mixed with the Varangians, they formed a separate Slavic-Scandinavian people, which was completely destroyed in the 16th century. Muscovy.

    Regarding the chronicle, where Veliky Novgorod is called “Russian land”, the situation here is as follows.

    There is a complete Kiev copy of the Novgorod Chronicle. Everything matches there, except for that one page where Veliky Novgorod is called “RUSSIAN LAND”.

    It is precisely this that is not in the Kyiv copy.

    Therefore, Shakhmatov concluded that this page was falsified, that it was inserted into the Novgorod Chronicle at the level of Art. 15.
    The Novgorodians wanted to give themselves respectability and called themselves Russia.

    Regarding Sanskrit.
    It is an ancient language and many languages ​​have common words.
    In general, the words “mother”, “woman”, etc. - these are words of all languages.

    But if that linguist compared Sanskrit with Russian, wouldn’t he know that the Russian language is new, recent, based on the Church Slavonic Old Bulgarian language, with an addition of Finno-Ugric vocabulary, as well as external borrowings.

    Isn't this a secret to anyone?

    And the original languages ​​of Central Russia are Finno-Ugric dialects.

    Up to 19th century Not a single monument of Slavic culture is known on the territory of Central Russia.
    The source is here.
    Goryunova E.I. Ethnic history of the Volga-Oka interfluve. - M.: Publishing House of the USSR Academy of Sciences, 1961. - P. 5.
  39. Vasya
    0
    13 July 2011 09: 24
    Oh, sorry, not up to the 19th century, but up to the 10th century. ))))
  40. Vasya
    0
    13 July 2011 09: 44
    dimitriy Yesterday, 16:47

    I provide links everywhere to historical research by Russian scientists from different eras.
    I don’t even specifically give Ukrainian studies so that you don’t make a fuss about bias.

    By the way, I haven’t read this article or the deputy’s interview.

    Well, he wrote everything correctly.

    It's not the article. but the fact is that what I am telling, many people of Ukraine know. But in Russia, it turns out, no one knows anything.

    The fact that the Ukrainian authorities do not officially tell Russia such things is dictated by diplomatic rules. They are asking to “soften” the wording so as not to upset the “northern neighbor”.

    Well, what did he write wrong? That Peter the Great was an arrogant king? Acted like a bandit?

    Peter the Great insulted his Russian people so much, you should read his correspondence. He himself called his subjects “cattle, animals,” etc.

    How did he treat people? How did he come up with instruments of torture?
    How did he have some kinks and force his entourage to chew the corpse with their teeth?

    And how did he order to dig up the Miloslavskys who had been buried 20 years before from the graves and pour the blood of those executed on their remains?

    Well, it’s no secret that in 1721 he stole the name RUSSIA from the Rus of Ukraine, which was later transformed into “Russia”.

    Regarding the possibility of Russia falling apart, this is no secret to anyone. Everyone is talking about it.

    As for the Ukrainian lands that Russia occupied in the past - Sloboda and Kuban - then it’s as they themselves want.
    It will be their decision whether to return to Ukraine and their family or stay separately.

    But this is not for Moscow to decide, and not for Kyiv, but for themselves.

    Historically, we know that in 1918 there was a Kuban People's Republic, which planned to join Ukraine.

    Maybe they will have the desire again.

    Especially in terms of their protection from the conflict-ridden Caucasus, so that Ukraine can help resolve this problem.

    After all, Moscow can only aggravate the Caucasus problem, and not solve it.
  41. pav
    pav
    0
    13 July 2011 10: 22
    Well Vasya! I respect you! I disagree about the Varangians. There is no evidence of their Scandinavian (Germanic) origin.
  42. Superduck
    0
    13 July 2011 11: 21
    Yes, there’s one thing I didn’t get right, here half of my throat is vomiting that Ukrainians and Russians are one people, then with the same success it proves the inferiority of Ukrainians. Could you guys explain to me your position on this issue? It feels like this conversation about the brotherhood of peoples is bullshit, I want to spit in someone’s face, but I can’t decide where to start...
    This is very interesting to me as a Russian-Ukrainian-Finno-Ugric.
  43. dimitriy
    0
    13 July 2011 11: 42
    Vasya Today, 09:44
    Can I ask a question?
    The majority on the forum who call themselves Russians say that we should live in peace, perhaps subject to certain conditions on each side, even live together, that we are one people.
    Question for you personally: what are you trying to achieve? the goal of all your opuses?
    1. Superduck
      0
      13 July 2011 12: 10
      Vasily is definitely a second dan master in Khokhlosracha, he hasn’t seen anyone like him for a long time, I’ll even say that he hasn’t seen him at all. He uses extensive documentary materials, although it’s not a fact that he’s read it all, because the speed and external accuracy of the answers is amazing, I even had a sneaking suspicion that there is such a profession - Khokhlosrist. In fact, everyone realizes that no one has enough time or energy to check the accuracy of quotes and sources, but this is actually not Vasily’s problem.
      Why does he do this? I also have my own opinion, I don’t want to humiliate Vasya at all, but this is actually a response of any living organism, for example, a strain of bacteria exposed to antibiotics for a long time becomes resistant to them after some time. What Vasily masterfully demonstrated is the adaptation of Ukrainophiles to information pressure on the topic of inferiority of Ukrainians and from the country from their Russian counterparts. Here what goes around comes around. At one time I also tried to delve into the topic, but I couldn’t master it, because history is such a thing... it’s not a science, actually, it’s a drawbar and an ideological tool, and I think this is obvious to everyone. The modern history of Rus' is also riddled with ideological garbage. Over the past few centuries, this garbage has been brought in by supporters of the Great Russian idea. Now Ukrainophiles have also received such an opportunity, and this is absolutely natural and I would even say normal. And everyone who is able to think is aware of this, the rest who have read to this point - leave this stupid activity, you will only get upset. I suspect that there is no truth in the middle, there is none at all, because the original historical documents have not been preserved and this is a fact, unfortunately. Therefore, I concluded for myself that there is simply nothing to argue about here. Well, whoever finds the strength to argue is the essence of the same process - propaganda, the only difference is who and when this information was poured into Moscow, most people generally subconsciously strive to fill their heads with fixed ideas, and what kind of ideas they will be - well, that’s the first thing will turn up.
      But at the same time, I take my hat off to him, I haven’t seen karate like this for a long time.
  44. Vasya
    0
    13 July 2011 12: 04
    pav Today, 10:22

    ))))

    Well then let's put it this way.

    Novgorodians are a separate Slovenian-Varangian people.

    That's right, until the identification of the Varangians with the Scandinavians is clearly established, we can speak in synchronous terms.

    Interest Ask. Are those Varangians who are described in the chronicles and who merged with the Slovenes of Novgorod the same Vikings who attacked Britain?
  45. Vasya
    0
    13 July 2011 12: 57
    SuperDuck Today, 11:21

    It's all about the lack of clarity of the situation.

    “Russians” are a multi-component complex entity.

    What is the main function of the word “Russians”?

    Index to ethnicity?

    No. Its function is imperial.

    Initially, "Russians" was a church confessional term that distinguished the population of the Orthodox lands from the rest of the non-Christian population in the Golden Horde.

    This canonical region of the Russian Orthodox Church in the Golden Horde, governed initially from Byzantium, in ecclesiastical matters, of course, nothing more, so this region was called “Rus”, and its believers were “Russians”.

    And in administrative and legal terms, everything was subordinate to Khan.

    Here is the answer to what the “sovereign of all Rus'” of the Moscow prince is.
    It’s like “sovereign”, but there is no “state”.

    There is neither a principality called “Rus”, nor a “state” for the Moscow Prince.
    The remaining principalities independently and separately pay taxes to the Khan, and report separately to the Khan.

    So, “Rus” is only an ecclesiastical concept, a canonical territory.
    Monastic colonization during the Horde was active, and accordingly Rus' expanded its territory.

    This is ecclesiastical Rus', not ethnic or state Russia.
    In reality, this concerned only Ukraine.

    And church jurisdiction, so to speak, is the business of Constantinople, it was Constantinople that called the Orthodox lands of the Horde “Rus”, and it was he who introduced the concept of “Russians” as a confessional concept.

    The title of “All Rus'” was adopted in 1492 by Ivan the Third at the insistence of his wife Sophia Paleologus, who wanted to introduce Byzantine traditions, where the Emperor was the head of the church, above the Patriarch.

    And in light of the seizure by the Moscow principality of other principalities of Zalesye after the collapse of the Golden Horde, then Ivan the Third with this title “sovereign of all Rus'” received ADVANTAGE in the war with the principalities, declared himself "the head of the Russian churches." And he announced the “Gathering of Russian lands,” that is, church lands, everything is true and clear.

    And although he is the “sovereign of all Rus',” he only remains the prince of Moscow, and not a monarch, and only his grandson Ivan the Terrible becomes king.

    So, the word “Russians” was a bookish church word, it was rarely used, so European countries used ethnonyms such as “Moscovite”, “Moskal”, “Moskvich”, “Moscow”.

    The Russian people themselves used the stable self-name “peasants”, constantly, continuously and clearly fixed.
  46. Vasya
    0
    13 July 2011 13: 00
    SuperDuck Today, 11:21
    Read more.

    Under Peter the Great, the word “Russian” changed its function.
    From a church concept it abruptly becomes formally ethnic, but in reality imperial.
    That is why Catherine the Second fought so hard to fix this word “Russians”.

    Muscovy - Finno-Ugric-Tatar captured everyone it could. And it was clear that the map had become motley.
    And Peter the Great decided to make a move.

    To hide everyone under a new name - “Russia” and “Russians”, in order to hide the invader - Muscovy, and erase all differences among the people.

    So, “Russians” is the first imperial generalization to erase differences in the empire.

    At the same time, national languages ​​were eliminated and Russian (more correctly “Moscow”) was implanted.

    Oh, how there was a war in Ukraine to eradicate the Ukrainian language and introduce Russian! Lingvocid!

    But it turned out to be absurd.
    Those peoples who could not resist being moscowed were made “Russian” once or twice.

    Those who were very different in appearance from the Finno-Ugric people, and also those who fought for their national identity, were recorded as half “Russians”.

    And what is the absurdity? And a resident of the Ivanovo region is Russian.
    And the Belarusian of Smolensk is Russian.
    And the dark-haired Ukrainian of Krasnodar is Russian.
    And the Buryats of the Irkutsk region with their corresponding appearance are Russian.
    And half of Tatarstan are Russians.
    And Tyva also has an overwhelming population of Russians.

    The Ukrainians did not allow themselves to be called Russian, they resisted and even changed their thousand-year-old name “Rusyn”.

    And how to put it all together into one? Unreal.
    Realizing the mistake, they introduced the term “Russian”, that is, “citizen of the state”.
    But what percentage of Russians were pushed into Russians?

    Probably 100%.
    If all Russians are returned to the ethnic groups of Russians, then a complete and adequate picture of the conquests of the Moscow principality will be restored.
    And the reverse process.

    With the collapse of the Russian Federation, the ethnonym "Russian" will lose its imperial function, and may cease to be used.

    Well, except for those who have already really lost their ethnic roots.

    "Russian" is clearly not an ethnic term. Church, imperial-national, yes.

    It’s one thing when a people is created organically from ethnic groups, and another thing when an empire is riveted together by force, and the thousand-year-old way of life of peoples is brutally broken.
  47. Vasya
    0
    13 July 2011 13: 02
    SuperDuck Today, 11:21
    Continuation of 2.

    This was the case with the second imperial generalization - “Soviet people”.

    But Moscow failed to complete this process, and the Moscow Empire began to collapse.

    Today Moscow has shown what it meant when it spoke about the “Soviet people.”

    The biggest cries about not allowing the former republics of the USSR to become independent come under the slogan “we will not allow them to leave the sphere of influence of the Russian world.”

    That is, it would be necessary to say “the Soviet world,” but everyone understands what we are talking about. That is Moscow now operates at the “Russian” level of the empire, the previous one. And the terminology is appropriate.

    So, for its imperialist purposes, Moscow does not care about the term, what it is called. An important function that ensures the process of rebuilding the empire.

    You see, what a difficult question on the topic of “Russians”.
    1. Superduck
      0
      13 July 2011 13: 28
      The question is certainly complex; I completely agree with you. The only question is that when they speak Russian, they often talk about completely different things. Most understand by this a superethnos, which is formed from the Eastern Slavs, Finno-Ugric peoples of northern Russia and the Urals, and even Tatars.
  48. Vasya
    0
    13 July 2011 13: 14
    dimitriy today, 11:42

    The article is stupid. fooling the population.

    And since the article was posted on another site for wide review, a reaction to this is necessary.

    And the second point.

    The conversation showed how much dialogue there is between Russia and Ukraine.

    Complete isolation and complete misunderstanding of each other’s position.

    I’m not trying to piss off readers, but I’m trying to convey adequate and logical information as it relates to Ukrainian-Russian relations.

    Not in a state sense, but in a universal human sense.

    This happens in Ukraine.
    Many people like to play annoying.

    They’ll throw in a word or two, and Russia will freak out.

    But I don’t do that, I write in essence.

    Where is the error in logic?
    Show!
  49. Vasya
    0
    13 July 2011 13: 47
    SuperDuck Today, 12:10

    Like it, right?

    So I'm not alone.
    A lot of people know this.

    And the fact that I know what to say, well, I have to figure it out.
    There aren't many controversial issues there.

    Everything is quite simple and the main Russian counterfeiters are known.

    There are several of them. This is Karamzin, then Pogodin with Sobolevsky, and finally Mavrodin, the Stalinist ideologist, creator of the fiction called “Old Russian Nationality.”

    This invention was very arrogant and vile.
    So much so that Soviet historians themselves in Stalin’s times, when they could have been shot for disagreeing with the party line, could not stand such lies and in 1951 held a scientific conference condemning and denying the Marodin “Old Russian people”.

    But Stalin decided that a historical prototype of a single Soviet people was needed - and Mavrodin came up with the “Old Russian people.”

    The Mavrodin scam is still official Russian history.
    It has been included in textbooks since 1954, dedicated to the 300th anniversary of the “Reunification of Ukraine with Russia.”

    But even at a primitive level the theory had problems.
    Mavrodin declared the appearance of the Old Russian people at the level of Art. 6, and Soviet archaeologists established the fact that up to Art. 10. In Central Russia, not a single monument of Slavic culture is known.

    Mavrodin could not explain anything about the reasons for the collapse of the ancient Russian nationality into three peoples: Russian, Ukrainian and Belarusian.

    Not only the reason for the collapse is not substantiated, but also the number of nations. Why three nations, and not more, according to the number of principalities, for example?

    And Mavrodin did not explain how it was that as a result of the Tatar-Mongol attack, such a state as Rus' instantly split into three nations.

    After all, it turns out that ethnic processes among individual cultural and linguistic groups were more powerful and stable than political and economic ones!

    And for natural changes of peoples in new political and economic realities, more time is needed, so, logically, the disintegration of the Old Russian nationality into peoples should have occurred later, at the level of 14-15 centuries, but there is no such data on this.

    In addition, he did not explain how integration processes were carried out in the ancient Russian people, located in such open spaces, when there were such distances and impassable obstacles for people.

    And Mavrodin did not answer what common ancestor the three peoples who supposedly emerged from the ancient Russian people should have had.

    Each people has its own individual ancestors.

    Do you see how confused the Russian authorities are, and what kind of blizzard they are telling you in textbooks?
  50. Vasya
    0
    13 July 2011 14: 23
    SuperDuck Today, 13:28

    But a people, although it may be made up of different ethnic groups, must be described by the necessary parameters, so to speak.

    Here's the language. Are you sure that the Tatars all adhere to the same language?

    Or, for example, a single mentality, a single soul of the people.

    Are you sure that the Tatars understand themselves as one with the rest?
    1. Superduck
      0
      13 July 2011 15: 07
      Quote: Vasya

      Here's the language. Are you sure that the Tatars all adhere to the same language?

      Or, for example, a single mentality, a single soul of the people.

      Are you sure that the Tatars understand themselves as one with the rest?

      No, I know not. Although it’s the same, I’m a quarter Udmurt, but I don’t know either the language or the customs, so I consider myself a Russian super-ethnic group, not a Martian, and my grandfather didn’t know the language either, only my great-grandmother knew. The second example is Yuri Shevchuk (ddt) who looks like a Tatrin-Tatrin, but he also considers himself Russian, it’s true..
      But as you’ve probably already noticed, the majority here don’t give a damn what you wrote and think. Why look for logic where no one needs it? winked
  51. Vasya
    0
    13 July 2011 14: 47
    SuperDuck Today, 12:10

    Western historians have even less data, but this does not prevent them from drawing up a normal historical picture.

    Regarding the ideological garbage and inventions of historians, the Russian side received proposals to organize international forums and conferences with the participation of three parties. Ukrainian historians, Russian and foreign.

    And clarify controversial issues on them.

    And at the same time, get rid of the pseudo-historical terms of Karamzin, Pogodin, Mavrodin, such as “Moscow Rus'”, “Novgorod Rus'”, “Old Russian state”, etc.

    Instead, use synchronous historical sources.
    Such as “Rus”, “Veliky Novgorod”, “Zalesye”, “Ulus Jochi” (Golden Horde).

    The Russian side is afraid, or what?

    There, in full view of everyone, openly and transparently, establish a solution to controversial issues.

    The only way.
    1. Superduck
      0
      13 July 2011 15: 08
      This is a utopia; if government historians do not work off their funding, they will quickly become amateurs.
  52. dimitriy
    0
    13 July 2011 15: 36
    Vasya Today, 13:14
    I asked a simple question that requires a one or two sentence answer. You again published an opus about nothing. Where's the answer? If “I try to convey adequate and logical information” is considered the answer, then the question arises: information about what? and what is the purpose of conveying this information??? Perhaps you have some IDEA? So give me a hint.
  53. consul
    0
    13 July 2011 20: 26
    Regarding Sanskrit.
    It is an ancient language and many languages ​​have common words.
    In general, the words “mother”, “woman”, etc. - these are words of all languages. (There are not only “mother”, “woman”, but the grammar is also similar)
    But if that linguist compared Sanskrit with Russian, wouldn’t he know that the Russian language is new, recent (probably forgot to ask you))), based on the Church Slavonic Old Bulgarian language, with an addition of Finno-Ugric vocabulary, as well as external borrowings.
    Isn't this a secret to anyone?
    -To come up with a language similar to Sanskrit, you need to at least know Sanskrit, and I wonder who would do it (is there really nothing else to do?) There are differences between Russian and Old Bulgarian. Finally, give examples of f-lexis and its similarities with Russian (about that Of course, you didn’t think that there could be an influence in the opposite direction). There are borrowings in any language, Ukrainian is no exception.
    And the original languages ​​of Central Russia (where there were or are compact settlements, no doubt) are Finno-Ugric dialects.
    Up to 10th century Not a single monument of Slavic culture is known on the territory of Central Russia.
    -there is such data about the Slavs:
    Fatyanovo culture - Bronze Age - in the Volga-Oka interfluve.
    Abashevo culture of the Bronze Age - in the Volga region.
    Gorodets culture - XNUMXth century BC. e. - XNUMXst millennium AD e. - in the Volga region.
    Ananyinskaya culture - VIII century BC. e. - in the Urals.
    At the same time, the Dyakovo culture also existed - XNUMXth century BC. e. - mid-XNUMXst millennium AD e. - in the Volga-Oka interfluve. The culture of the ancient Finno-Ugric tribes (ancestors known from the chronicles as the Merya and the Whole, as well as a number of others), who lived in the basin of the upper reaches of the Volga, Oka and within the Valdai Upland. Some historians attribute some of the monuments of the Dyakovo culture to the ancestors of the Slavs.
    Thus, it is clear that the Slavs not only lived around Kyiv. By the way, some Tatar nationalists consider Kyiv their (Nogai it seems) ancient settlement and founded by them. I don’t believe in this, but there is such a view.
  54. consul
    0
    13 July 2011 20: 28
    Next.
    If all Russians are returned to the ethnic groups of Russians, then a complete and adequate picture of the conquests of the Moscow principality will be restored.
    -there is no need for this, since in Russia everyone is already in the ethnic groups to which they belong. There are no restrictions on this, even if you call yourself a Martian and organize a cult. autonomy, you can make up your own story.
    After analyzing your comments, I also had a question like dimitriy - for what? What will the separation of the Slavic peoples give you and those who think like you (your comments, politicized on the topic of history in one direction, are not at all convincing, note that I did not use such at all, since this would lead away from the topic in a completely different direction)? My goal in this conversation is to show I don’t doubt that Russians are Slavs, united in one word, that on the territory of today’s Ukraine there are also Rusyns (who once consisted of Polyans and other Slavic tribes) (and not excursions into history, which in itself is also interesting) .
    The conversation showed how much dialogue there is between Russia and Ukraine.
    Loud words, in reality it’s different (regarding the dialogue). regnum.ru/news/polit/1423718.html - in the photo (Oleg Soskin) is not a Rusyn at all ((.
  55. Vasya
    0
    13 July 2011 20: 56
    SuperDuck Today, 15:07

    Shevchuk looks like a Tatar, calls himself Russian, but his last name is Ukrainian. ))))

    And not Central Ukrainian, but more Western Ukrainian. Such surnames ending in -uk, -yuk are sotatkas from the era of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania.

    So they had the ending -ukas, -yukas, and then transformed into the modern form.

    His former surname was Shevchukas. Maybe. ))))
  56. Vasya
    0
    13 July 2011 20: 59
    dimitriy today, 15:36

    what is the purpose of conveying this information??? Perhaps you have some IDEA? So give me a hint.


    Destruction of the myths of the past that interfere with Ukrainian-Russian relations and stand in the way.
  57. Vasya
    0
    13 July 2011 21: 02
    consul Today, 20:26

    And which scientists attribute Finno-Ugric monuments to the 19th century? to Slavic?

    What are they based on?

    Not Fomenko and Nosovsky. This is pseudoscience.
  58. Vasya
    0
    13 July 2011 21: 15
    consul Today, 20:28

    If you are interested in the Slavic belt of Russia, then this is Western Russia, a term that is not used.

    This is the Belarusian Smolensk region, this is the Belarusian-Ukrainian Bryansk, according to the old Starodub region.

    And then the Ukrainian lands are part of Russia.
    This is Eastern Slobozhanshchina, part of Ukraine - Voronezh, Kursk, Orel, Belgorod, part of Lipetsk.
    This is Kuban and Stavropol, this is Adygea, this is part of Karasay-Cherkessia.
    These are Taganrog, Rostov-on-Don, Novorossiysk. What is called the Raspberry Wedge.

    This is Gray Wedge - Omsk, part of northern Kazakhstan.
    This is Green Wedge - Primorsky Territory - Vladivostok, Khabarovsk, Ussuriysk.
    This is a purely Ukrainian region.

    This is the Yellow Wedge - the middle and lower Volga region, where there are many Ukrainians.
    Saratov, Volgograd, Samara, Togliatti, Kazan, Astrakhan, as well as the southern Urals - Orenburg, Uralsk, Aktyubinsk, Orsk, Guryev.

    There are also Ukrainians in Siberia and Magadan.

    That's where geneticists can find Slavs.

    But it’s clear that everyone was labeled “Russian” by terror and brazenly, and the Ukrainian language was banned.

    What do Rusyns have to do with Ukraine? A small bunch of them.

    Regarding Soskin, well, the surname is not a fact yet.
    I have friends who are Ukrainians, only their grandfather or great-grandfather was Russian.
    There is little Russian blood, but the Russian surname has been preserved.
  59. consul
    0
    13 July 2011 21: 47
    Regarding Soskin, well, the surname is not a fact yet.
    I have friends who are Ukrainians, only their grandfather or great-grandfather was Russian.
    There is little Russian blood, but the Russian surname has been preserved.
    -in general, I meant that he is a Jew (Galkin, Malkin, etc.) - long-time spiteful critics of Russia and Ukraine. In Russia, Jews mostly have surnames with -kin.
    1. Superduck
      0
      13 July 2011 21: 56
      Pushkin was still there! However, definitely not Russian
  60. consul
    0
    13 July 2011 22: 05
    So Pushkin did not make a coup in Russia and did not plunder the country. And in Ukraine he did not give out the keys to churches for money, etc.
  61. Vasya
    0
    14 July 2011 09: 15
    And our Jews, in addition to the traditional ones similar to Polish ones with the ending -sky, also have such surnames as Sugar, Hopak, Pirog.
  62. Vasya
    0
    15 July 2011 06: 22
    Alex July 11, 2011 02:13

    The Bible is the Word of God.
  63. Tankograd
    0
    15 July 2011 20: 07
    Brothers! All of you, Russians, Ukrainians and Belarusians, as well as all the other Slavs of the Earth, are half brothers! You open the Vedic Rus' website and there the entire connection between the Slavic-Aryan language and Sanskrit is described! Just don’t think that the Bible is the word of God. The Bible was drawn by Jews and painted for themselves. Especially these topics: how you were hit on one cheek and you turn the other. Pre-Christian Rus' did not have these crazy ideas in their heads! This was precisely what Prince Svyatoslav proved in 866 by defeating Khazaria, where Judaism was the state religion!
  64. Vasya
    0
    16 July 2011 10: 28
    Tankograd Yesterday, 20:07

    How to stop the chain of evil?

    Or should we repay evil for evil?

    Regarding all the Slavs.

    If all Slavs are brothers, then why does Russia consider all Slavs traitors?
  65. Rusyn
    0
    16 July 2011 20: 16
    In principle, today some linguists are inclined to think that the “Russians” are non-Slavic peoples who were formerly dependent in the political, linguistic and religious sense on the Rusyn-Ukrainians. Otherwise, then this strange ethnonym “Russian” came from, i.e. whose and not who.

    After all, NO Slavic people call themselves that, there are no Polish, Czech, Croatian, Serbian, Bulgarian, etc.

    During the colonization of Zalesye by Rusyns-Ukrainians, local non-Slovenian tribes (Vyatichi-Lekhites, Merya and Golyad) fall into political dependence on Rusyns-Ukrainians, and during the Christianization of these tribes, the process of Slavicization of Zalesye begins through “Bulgarization”, i.e. through the perception of these tribes of the Bulgarian language passed through Kyiv (Ukrainian true Russian) filters. Along with the Bulgarian language, part of the actual Ukrainian (Russian) vocabulary also ends up in Zalesye.

    Somewhat later, the Rusyn-Ukrainians themselves begin to call the assimilated peoples of Zalesye “ours,” “theirs,” i.e. "Russians", clearly distinguishing these "Russians" from themselves, i.e. from the Rusyns. This ethnonym “Russian” was finally fixed after the Mongol-Tatar yoke and was first used only at the end of the 17th century (80-90 of the 17th century). And the commonly used ethnonym “Russian” became even later....
  66. Vasya
    0
    17 July 2011 09: 45
    Rusin Yesterday, 20:16

    Moreover, while Philotheus was promoting the “Third Rome”, they even tried to call themselves not “Russians”, but “Romans”, as in the former Byzantium.

    The Moscow princes did not dare to call themselves the “Third Roman Empire”; they were afraid of the reaction of Turkey and the Crimean Khanate.

    But Filofey sent out the text like this.
    “All the Christian kingdoms came to an end and the kingdom of our ruler came down into one according to the prophetic books, that is, the Roman kingdom.”

    The word "Roman" is written in all old copies of Philotheus' epistles. But after the 16th century. Instead of "Romeyskoe" it is written everywhere "Roseiskoe".
  67. 0
    17 July 2011 10: 13
    Quote: Vasya
    I did not read Fomenka and Nosovsky.

    All that I write is according to Russian sources.


    Well, it’s as if they also operate with non-American ones. Pseudoscience? Yes, especially from the point of view of those who are not satisfied with this formulation of the question.

    Quote: Vasya
    And away all sorts of fabrications of Karamzin and Pogodin such as "Moscow Rus", "Novgorod Rus", "Suzdal Rus", "Vladimir Rus", "North-Eastern Rus".

    Such states were never in history!


    I agree. There was no pull on the state. And the word “Rus” in this context can be easily replaced with synonyms “volost”, “region”, “principality”... It does not change the essence. But the habitat remains, no matter how you look at it.