Historum - History Forums  

Go Back   Historum - History Forums > World History Forum > European History
Register Forums Blogs Social Groups Mark Forums Read

European History European History Forum - Western and Eastern Europe including the British Isles, Scandinavia, Russia


Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old December 6th, 2012, 02:05 AM   #151
Scholar
 
Joined: Sep 2012
Posts: 644

Quote:
Originally Posted by Potap View Post
Thanks for the picture "404 - Page Not Found". I did not see such beautiful pictures for a long time already.
Here is the whole link. Pretty pictures in it. No need to be nasty. Enjoy. BBC News - In pictures: Russian Empire in colour photos
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by arras View Post
If I remember right, Russians attacked Constantinople twice. They were also allied at times, Russians helped Byzantines fight Bulgars for example.
 
You mean Kievan Rus helped Roman empire. Terms Eastern and Byzantine were "invented" almost 1000 years later. Regarding term "Russians", Slavs, Varangians and numerous other people and tribes, took part in the forming of Russian identity throught centures, so these guys under Igor and Sviatoslav command were not yet.. er.. russians
Indeed Sviatoslav defeated the czar Boris II and in fact occupied the northern part of First Bulgarian Empire for a while. This was in fact the begining of the end for the latter. Romans of coarse /reading wikipedia/ took the opportunity and stabbed him in the back, aka bribed the Pechenegs to attack and besiege Kiev, where Olga stayed with Sviatoslav's son Vladimir.Yes, same Vladimir. Kievan Rus was pagan yet.
By the way I wonder why you people discuss Kievan Rus. I believe the OP question was about Tsardom of Russia (Tsarist Russia) and perhaps(?) history of Imperial Russia.
At Each Kilometer is offline  
Remove Ads
Old December 6th, 2012, 02:31 AM   #152

arras's Avatar
Historian
 
Joined: Apr 2010
From: Slovakia
Posts: 14,601

Quote:
Originally Posted by At Each Kilometer View Post
You mean Kievan Rus helped Roman empire. Terms Eastern and Byzantine were "invented" almost 1000 years later.
Wasn't term "Kievan Rus" also invented later?
arras is offline  
Old December 6th, 2012, 02:57 AM   #153
Scholar
 
Joined: Sep 2012
Posts: 644

Indeed I guess, it is a tough thing to be "historically" correct. How they called themselves back then? /reading wikipedia/ "Rus Khaganate"? Their rulers had a typical turkic title?! I am totally lost.
At Each Kilometer is offline  
Old December 6th, 2012, 03:13 AM   #154

arras's Avatar
Historian
 
Joined: Apr 2010
From: Slovakia
Posts: 14,601

Quote:
Originally Posted by At Each Kilometer View Post
Indeed I guess, it is a tough thing to be "historically" correct. How they called themselves back then? /reading wikipedia/ "Rus Khaganate"? Their rulers had a typical turkic title?! I am totally lost.
Early Rus were under influence of Khazars who were dominating power to the East of Rus. Rus imitated some of their customs and titles (even hearcut if I remember right). Later they came under influence of "Romans" whom we today call East Romans or Byzantines and did the same ...see origin of title "czar".

Back in those time countries did not had official titles. Rusian khaganate is also modern term. Russian rulers simply adopted title of "khagan", that is why we call their state khaganate. "State" during those times was simply power some potentate could execute. Means potentate (king, ruler, prince, khagan, caesar ...does not matter how he titled himself) was THE state.

If you would wanted to make specific reference to land, as opposed to ruler or people, you would probably call it something like "land of the Rus".

Last edited by arras; December 6th, 2012 at 03:21 AM.
arras is offline  
Old December 6th, 2012, 03:30 AM   #155

Mosquito's Avatar
bloody
 
Joined: Apr 2011
From: Sarmatia
Posts: 5,821

Kiev Russ was not started by Scandinavians but by Poles and Kiev is an ancient Polish city

Click the image to open in full size.



Click the image to open in full size.

You can see on the maps that Kiev is on the territory of Poles (Poljane, Polianians). Part of the tribe moved west and created Polish Kingdom in the end of 10th century.
Mosquito is offline  
Old December 6th, 2012, 03:38 AM   #156
Scholar
 
Joined: Sep 2012
Posts: 644

Quote:
Originally Posted by arras View Post
Early Rus were under influence of Khazars who were dominating power to the East of Rus. Rus imitated some of their customs and titles (even hearcut if I remember right).
Bloody Khazars. The "bulgar" part in me hate them in the guts. The bastards influenced Russian ancestors a bit you say. I suppose there was a posibility these guys to accept judaism as Khazars did? Oh the horror, the horror

Thanks for the info Arras. Much appreciated
At Each Kilometer is offline  
Old December 6th, 2012, 03:53 AM   #157

arras's Avatar
Historian
 
Joined: Apr 2010
From: Slovakia
Posts: 14,601

Quote:
Originally Posted by At Each Kilometer View Post
Bloody Khazars. The "bulgar" part in me hate them in the guts. The bastards influenced Russian ancestors a bit you say. I suppose there was a posibility these guys to accept judaism as Khazars did? Oh the horror, the horror

Thanks for the info Arras. Much appreciated
You're welcome

May be I can ease your pain by saying that later Rus destroyed Khazars

As for chance of Rus adopting Judaism, I do not know anything about it. Judaism generally did not had large potential of converting people as it is basically tribal religion. It does not have universal appeal of Christianity or Islam.
arras is offline  
Old December 6th, 2012, 03:54 AM   #158

antonina's Avatar
Historian
 
Joined: Mar 2011
From: Warsaw, Poland
Posts: 5,713

Quote:
Originally Posted by Potap View Post
Thanks Wiki, now you can tell a few words about "Nestor's chronicle".
Not Wiki, Ludwik Bazylow. You don't imagine there aren't any books on Russian history here do you ?

Actually, I've noticed I made language slip yesterday and I apologize: I questioned the notion of "Russia stemming from Kievan Rus" - I used the wrong expression and you quite rightly criticized it. What I had in mind is the notion of "Russia being the legitimate successor/continuator of Kievan Rus" + the accompanying myth of the Kremlin's right to "gather all Rusian lands into one fold".

I didn't question Russia's "deriving" from the Old Rus (Kievan Rus) - it did, just like Ukraine and Belarus did.

What I (and others) do question is denying Ukrainians and Belarusians the right to separate language, nationhood and statehood - which is what Tzarist/Soviet historiography and propaganda have persistently been doing.

Vide Kornijchuk's opera Bohdan Chmielnicki - in the final scene the guy swoons about Ukraine finally returning into the arms of Mother Russia. This (as I hope you know) is unmitigated codswallop - the Cossak hetman Chmielnicki spilled a sea of Polish and Ukrainian blood for free Ukraine - an independent Ukrainian state. Not to be ruled by the Kremlin.

Ever since Jaroslav the Wise died (11th century) the paths of Ruthenians and Russians diverged, by 14/15th century Ruthenian languages (Ukrainian and Belarusian) spoken in the Grand Duchy of Lithuania and the Polish Kingdom were already quite distinct from Russian. Ukraine and Belarus developed in completely different conditions than the Duchy of Moscow - for 400 years they were part of the Polish/Lithuanian Commonwealth, and for 600 years - within the orbit of Polish culture. Not what you'll learn from Russian sources.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Potap View Post
And I repeat again I'd shot your officers in Katyn too. Your resentment is funny.
You said "It was war Madam" and "they were enemies of my country".

The Katyn Massacre took place in April - May 1940. How was this war?

The Polish officers (mainly of the reserve) were unarmed POWS, methodically shot in the back of the head in peacetime.

The systematic massacre of over 111,000 Polish civilians from Soviet Ukraine and Belarus was also carried out in peacetime - 1937/38. How was this war?

How can you say you'd take nagan and shoot them too? You can't mean it.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Potap View Post
Thanks for the picture "404 - Page Not Found". I did not see such beautiful pictures for a long time already.
Sorry, had a technical problem and couldn't enclose the link properly. The pictures are beautiful.
http://www.loc.gov/exhibits/empire/
antonina is offline  
Old December 6th, 2012, 04:00 AM   #159

antonina's Avatar
Historian
 
Joined: Mar 2011
From: Warsaw, Poland
Posts: 5,713

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mosquito View Post
Kiev Russ was not started by Scandinavians but by Poles and Kiev is an ancient Polish city

You can see on the maps that Kiev is on the territory of Poles (Poljane, Polianians). Part of the tribe moved west and created Polish Kingdom in the end of 10th century.

I hope our Russian mates can see a joke when they see it (but I doubt it, we're not on the same wave lengths humour-wise )
antonina is offline  
Old December 6th, 2012, 04:05 AM   #160

arras's Avatar
Historian
 
Joined: Apr 2010
From: Slovakia
Posts: 14,601

Quote:
Originally Posted by antonina View Post

I hope our Russian mates can see a joke when they see it (but I doubt it, we're not on the same wave lengths humour-wise )
I would not make such jokes, our Russian friends can see it as legitimate reason for Russia to bring Poles back in to "arms of Mother Russia". After all, if Poles founded Rus than they are Russians
arras is offline  
Reply

  Historum > World History Forum > European History

Tags
russia, tsarist


Thread Tools
Display Modes


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Russia or USA? Cavanboy Philosophy, Political Science, and Sociology 229 July 29th, 2014 01:25 AM
Why Russia? Magnate European History 465 March 7th, 2014 02:16 PM
Why is Russia so big? lokariototal European History 46 March 3rd, 2011 06:58 AM
Russia Mariyka Khetagurova European History 236 April 2nd, 2010 08:52 AM
***RUSSIA**** Anton_Drexler History Help 10 March 8th, 2010 06:00 PM

Copyright © 2006-2013 Historum. All rights reserved.