Originally posted by Cian McGuire
Yes, they ailing state of Kievan Rus was ultimately conquered by the Horde...
...he was the Antichrist, and the destroyer of what they considered to be the great Russian traditions.
Yes, they ailing state of Kievan Rus was ultimately conquered by the Horde...
...he was the Antichrist, and the destroyer of what they considered to be the great Russian traditions.
I can understand British English perfectly well, however that does not make us the same culture or civilization.
Incorrectly.
The 'Great Russians' of Moscow never had a direct link to Kiev Rus until 1686 when they wrested control of "East Bank Ukraine" from Poland-Lithuania.
Similarly, Kiev Rus was not the first Slavic state, although it did grow to be the East Slav state with the greatest impact up until Muscovy's rise to international power in the seventeenth century.
And the succession of states can be roughly viewed as Scythia-> Sarmatia-> the Germanic, migratory and ephemeral states of the Goths and Alemmani -> the Hunnish state -> Khazaria -> Kievan Rus-> the assorted states of Ukraine as ruled by the Cossack Hetman-> Russian hegemony-> modern, independant state of Ukraine
The 'Great Russians' of Moscow never had a direct link to Kiev Rus until 1686 when they wrested control of "East Bank Ukraine" from Poland-Lithuania.
Similarly, Kiev Rus was not the first Slavic state, although it did grow to be the East Slav state with the greatest impact up until Muscovy's rise to international power in the seventeenth century.
And the succession of states can be roughly viewed as Scythia-> Sarmatia-> the Germanic, migratory and ephemeral states of the Goths and Alemmani -> the Hunnish state -> Khazaria -> Kievan Rus-> the assorted states of Ukraine as ruled by the Cossack Hetman-> Russian hegemony-> modern, independant state of Ukraine
That's why we consider Kiev Rus as first Slavic state, as our root. OUR
An attempt to portray Kiev Rus as root of Ukraine only, looks like really big mistake in my eyes.
Comment