The Unz Review - Mobile
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 TeasersRussian Reaction Blog
Russia Doesn't Leave Its Own Behind
🔊 Listen RSS
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information



=>

Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • BShow CommentNext New CommentNext New Reply
Search Text Case Sensitive  Exact Words  Include Comments
List of Bookmarks

The basics on Denis Voronenkov: Communist MP. Bombastically patriotic. He led the way on highly needed and necessary legislation, such as a ban on Pokemon Go, and often waxed lyrical about the “patriotic” and “non-materialistic” values instilled on him by his Komsomol education.

This patriotism and lack of materialism expressed itself in the form of a $5 million apartment in the center of Moscow, a small fleet of luxury cars, a celebrity opera singer wife, and the respect of his fellow Kremlin elites. Current head of the SVR Sergey Naryshkin sang at his wedding to Untied Russia deputy Maksakova, which the Duma hailed as its “first interfactional wedding.”

He acquired his riches by selling favors to businessmen in return for promises of official access, and there’s not entirely incredible allegations that he ordered a contract killing (on a businessman who claimed that he had reneged on one of those promises).

However, at some point he crossed the wrong people, and there were rumors that an investigation would be started up when his parliamentary immunity was to run out in December 2016.

What’s a Russian communist patriot who finds himself the subject of criminal proceedings to do?

To flee to the UkSSR, of course, where he is warmly welcomed into the Maidan elites, including accelerated citizenship (in contrast, the Russian useful idiots who went to fight for the Revolution of Dignity and a future for white children have long since been thrown to the winds; many have struggled to even get a residency permit).

There, he goes from fighting Pokemon Go in Russia to calling Russia a latter-day Nazi Germany.

voronenkov-prophecy

In December 2016, soon after settling down in Kiev, he gloated: “First the downed fighter pilot. Now the Russian ambassador. Who’s next?”

Why, you:

voronenko-pays-his-mite

Who did it?

To be sure, Russian special forces are one; it’s not exactly a secret that intelligence services have a special hatred for traitors. Voronenkov was not only a politician, but had once worked in the Federal Drug Control Service, which was once a full-fledged “silovik” institution until it was dissolved and merged into the Interior Ministry in 2016. Not only was he a traitor, but he was also an outspoken one – in his last interview, published just today, he claimed that someone who understood the FSB, like himself, could simply “walk away” from them. That was essentially taunting them to get him.

That said, this was a very sloppy hit by Russian intelligence service standards.

I don’t think Poroshenko & Co. had anything to do with it. He was pretty useless – in the end, he was a lowly Duma deputy, and as such not privy to any of the real decision-making processes – but his chequered history hardly makes a great face as a democratic martyr done in by ROG.

It could also have been a banal falling out with his new “business partners” in Ukraine. Crime has risen since 2014, and the likelihood of such disputes being resolved through guns, not paperwork, is now higher.

That said, there is a good chance he was killed by genuine Ukrainian nationalists. They hate Poroshenko, and they cannot be very happy about the red carpet treatment rolled out for someone who not only supported but helped enable Crimea’s incorporation into Russia.

According to the latest reports, his killer – who has just died in hospital – was an ATO veteran and a member of the National Guard. Now yes, its possible that Russian intelligence services outsourced the assassination. But Occam’s Razor suggests that it was just a case of excessive svidomism.

In which case, just today: Glory to Ukraine! Glory to the hero.

PS. Since this story is such a succinct metaphor for everything wrong with everything – with the Russian elites, the Ukrainian elites, the Western media, and the Ukrainian nationalist yahoos who so conveniently insist on shooting their own country in the foot so regularly – that there will definitely soon be a longer post on this. First, though, a couple of minor technical issues with the blog software need to be fixed.

 
• Category: Foreign Policy • Tags: Assassinations, Elites, Russia, Svidomy, Ukraine 
Show 85 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
  1. That people like this come to a sticky end is one piece of evidence suggesting there may be a God.
    I wonder which gangster will inherit the whore Maksakova from him. He won’t be the third, or the fifth, or the tenth.

    Read More
    • Agree: Felix Keverich
    • LOL: Anatoly Karlin
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  2. AK: Thanks.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  3. I tried to fathom why he would want to ban Pokemon Go without looking it up, and I just cannot think of anything. Perhaps Japanese pop culture will make Russians want to give back the Kurile/Northern to Japan, thus ban it.

    Read More
    • Replies: @ziel
    Because it is so contemptibly bourgeois
    , @inertial
    I don't know about his reasons specifically, but in Russia is is widely assumed that Pokémon Go sends its location data straight to NSA.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  4. @neutral
    I tried to fathom why he would want to ban Pokemon Go without looking it up, and I just cannot think of anything. Perhaps Japanese pop culture will make Russians want to give back the Kurile/Northern to Japan, thus ban it.

    Because it is so contemptibly bourgeois

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  5. I for one, see no issue in banning Pokemon go (to the polls).

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  6. @neutral
    I tried to fathom why he would want to ban Pokemon Go without looking it up, and I just cannot think of anything. Perhaps Japanese pop culture will make Russians want to give back the Kurile/Northern to Japan, thus ban it.

    I don’t know about his reasons specifically, but in Russia is is widely assumed that Pokémon Go sends its location data straight to NSA.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  7. The next time I mention Poroshenko, Kasparov, Masha Gessen or John McCain on the Internet, I’m going to put the “anti-Soviet” label right after their names. I think they’re much more representative of that body of thought than a Kiev junta collaborator is of modern Communists.

    Read More
    • Replies: @AP
    Until Voronenko fled he wasn't that atypical of a modern Communist Party leader or of a modern Russian lawmaker. He was probably worse than most, but not an outlier.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  8. @Glossy
    The next time I mention Poroshenko, Kasparov, Masha Gessen or John McCain on the Internet, I'm going to put the "anti-Soviet" label right after their names. I think they're much more representative of that body of thought than a Kiev junta collaborator is of modern Communists.

    Until Voronenko fled he wasn’t that atypical of a modern Communist Party leader or of a modern Russian lawmaker. He was probably worse than most, but not an outlier.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  9. Only about a Ukraine could a sensible article be written about Pokemon Go!, trophy brides, and lava Ukraine!

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  10. “I don’t want to stay a deputy my whole life long.”
    “Your whole life won’t be long.”

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  11. It was the Yakuza that did it, no question. Banning Pokemon Go, a big money maker, was a red line that was crossed.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  12. What is svidomism? From context, and google search results, perhaps excessive nationalism?

    BTW, google offers: Did you mean: sodomized ?

    No, I’m pretty sure he didn’t mean that.

    Read More
    • Replies: @iffen
    What is svidomism?

    This is copied from a comment by AP, I guess it is the same AP that is in this comment section.

    the word "Svidomite" (a vulgar and derogatory word used by Russian nationalists to describe Ukrainians who support their native culture. It's a mixture of the Ukainian word "svidomiy" - conscious or self-aware" and "sodomite.")
     
    AK: It's a useful shorthand, just like "vatnik" (which I also use).
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  13. @Critical Eye
    What is svidomism? From context, and google search results, perhaps excessive nationalism?

    BTW, google offers: Did you mean: sodomized ?

    No, I'm pretty sure he didn't mean that.

    What is svidomism?

    This is copied from a comment by AP, I guess it is the same AP that is in this comment section.

    the word “Svidomite” (a vulgar and derogatory word used by Russian nationalists to describe Ukrainians who support their native culture. It’s a mixture of the Ukainian word “svidomiy” – conscious or self-aware” and “sodomite.”)

    AK: It’s a useful shorthand, just like “vatnik” (which I also use).

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anatoly Karlin
    BTW, commenter Kilo 4/11 in the other thread has very helpfully provided an excellent example of svidomism:

    Ukrainians view their nation as one of the oldest in Europe and Asia: with roots in the ancient Trypillian (Cucuteni/Tripolie) civilization that laid the foundation of the Ukrainian nation and culture over 5000 years ago. Other precursors were the Timber grave culture and Proto Indo Europeans. Many unique practices in modern Ukrainian culture and even words date back specifically to these civilizations.

    Since then, human life that existed on inhabited parts of modern Ukraine always shared the same collective conscience (the key trait of a nation), from Kyivian Rus to Cossack states...
     
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  14. If russian intelligence kills every traitor, there would be a huge cemetery. So no, it is definitely not russian intelligence

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  15. @iffen
    What is svidomism?

    This is copied from a comment by AP, I guess it is the same AP that is in this comment section.

    the word "Svidomite" (a vulgar and derogatory word used by Russian nationalists to describe Ukrainians who support their native culture. It's a mixture of the Ukainian word "svidomiy" - conscious or self-aware" and "sodomite.")
     
    AK: It's a useful shorthand, just like "vatnik" (which I also use).

    BTW, commenter Kilo 4/11 in the other thread has very helpfully provided an excellent example of svidomism:

    Ukrainians view their nation as one of the oldest in Europe and Asia: with roots in the ancient Trypillian (Cucuteni/Tripolie) civilization that laid the foundation of the Ukrainian nation and culture over 5000 years ago. Other precursors were the Timber grave culture and Proto Indo Europeans. Many unique practices in modern Ukrainian culture and even words date back specifically to these civilizations.

    Since then, human life that existed on inhabited parts of modern Ukraine always shared the same collective conscience (the key trait of a nation), from Kyivian Rus to Cossack states…

    Read More
    • Replies: @guy
    I noticed that if you suggest that the varangians of kievan rus were swedes, both ukrainians and russians get angry. Is svidomism like your example basically a calmer extension of the balkan/indian/turkish flame war propaganda?
    , @Hunsdon
    Bozhe moi! I'd never heard of this bastardized version of Sarmatianism before, but I guess you learn something new every day! (In fairness, my understanding of Uke nationalism goes about as far as the Azov Battalion.)
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  16. Gunned down in the street in broad daylight. Minimalist. Honest and elegant compared to all these fake suicides. And not a bad way to die if you think about it.

    Read More
    • Replies: @CK
    Any death that does not involve multiple screaming orgasms and various extravagant sexual activities; and/or multiple participants is a " bad way to die."
    To paraphrase V for Vendetta, A death without chocolate syrup and whipped...
    cream; is a death not worth having.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  17. @WorkingClass
    Gunned down in the street in broad daylight. Minimalist. Honest and elegant compared to all these fake suicides. And not a bad way to die if you think about it.

    Any death that does not involve multiple screaming orgasms and various extravagant sexual activities; and/or multiple participants is a ” bad way to die.”
    To paraphrase V for Vendetta, A death without chocolate syrup and whipped…
    cream; is a death not worth having.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Kilo 4/11
    "Any death that does not involve multiple screaming orgasms and various extravagant sexual activities ... "

    Ah, CK - you are a man (or woman, or beast) after my own heart! Well, the heart I had thirty and more years ago ...
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  18. @Anatoly Karlin
    BTW, commenter Kilo 4/11 in the other thread has very helpfully provided an excellent example of svidomism:

    Ukrainians view their nation as one of the oldest in Europe and Asia: with roots in the ancient Trypillian (Cucuteni/Tripolie) civilization that laid the foundation of the Ukrainian nation and culture over 5000 years ago. Other precursors were the Timber grave culture and Proto Indo Europeans. Many unique practices in modern Ukrainian culture and even words date back specifically to these civilizations.

    Since then, human life that existed on inhabited parts of modern Ukraine always shared the same collective conscience (the key trait of a nation), from Kyivian Rus to Cossack states...
     

    I noticed that if you suggest that the varangians of kievan rus were swedes, both ukrainians and russians get angry. Is svidomism like your example basically a calmer extension of the balkan/indian/turkish flame war propaganda?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anatoly Karlin

    I noticed that if you suggest that the varangians of kievan rus were swedes, both ukrainians and russians get angry.
     
    Yes, I would say that that is also svidomism.

    The difference is that amongst Russians it is a very small percentage of marginals, whereas in Ukraine a substantial proportion of the population holds to a svidomy interpretation of history, including their President.
    , @melanf

    I noticed that if you suggest that the varangians of kievan rus were swedes, both ukrainians and russians get angry.
     
    For Ukraine will not say, but in Russia the fact that varangians were vikings is quite generally accepted. This is not only written in the textbooks, but also it is common place historical novels, movies, etc.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  19. @Anatoly Karlin
    BTW, commenter Kilo 4/11 in the other thread has very helpfully provided an excellent example of svidomism:

    Ukrainians view their nation as one of the oldest in Europe and Asia: with roots in the ancient Trypillian (Cucuteni/Tripolie) civilization that laid the foundation of the Ukrainian nation and culture over 5000 years ago. Other precursors were the Timber grave culture and Proto Indo Europeans. Many unique practices in modern Ukrainian culture and even words date back specifically to these civilizations.

    Since then, human life that existed on inhabited parts of modern Ukraine always shared the same collective conscience (the key trait of a nation), from Kyivian Rus to Cossack states...
     

    Bozhe moi! I’d never heard of this bastardized version of Sarmatianism before, but I guess you learn something new every day! (In fairness, my understanding of Uke nationalism goes about as far as the Azov Battalion.)

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  20. @guy
    I noticed that if you suggest that the varangians of kievan rus were swedes, both ukrainians and russians get angry. Is svidomism like your example basically a calmer extension of the balkan/indian/turkish flame war propaganda?

    I noticed that if you suggest that the varangians of kievan rus were swedes, both ukrainians and russians get angry.

    Yes, I would say that that is also svidomism.

    The difference is that amongst Russians it is a very small percentage of marginals, whereas in Ukraine a substantial proportion of the population holds to a svidomy interpretation of history, including their President.

    Read More
    • Replies: @ussr andy
    Russia had Fomenkoism (two main theses, iirc - the mongols were us and we wuz gypshuns), but it was more of a pseudo-historic crankery, like ancient astronauts, than anything political.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  21. @Anatoly Karlin

    I noticed that if you suggest that the varangians of kievan rus were swedes, both ukrainians and russians get angry.
     
    Yes, I would say that that is also svidomism.

    The difference is that amongst Russians it is a very small percentage of marginals, whereas in Ukraine a substantial proportion of the population holds to a svidomy interpretation of history, including their President.

    Russia had Fomenkoism (two main theses, iirc – the mongols were us and we wuz gypshuns), but it was more of a pseudo-historic crankery, like ancient astronauts, than anything political.

    Read More
    • Replies: @ussr andy

    two main theses,
     
    oh, and the first millennium is a late medieval fabrication by European monks.
    , @Anatoly Karlin
    Sure, and who is the most well known proponent of Fomenkoism? Crazed Russophobe neocon Kasparov.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  22. @ussr andy
    Russia had Fomenkoism (two main theses, iirc - the mongols were us and we wuz gypshuns), but it was more of a pseudo-historic crankery, like ancient astronauts, than anything political.

    two main theses,

    oh, and the first millennium is a late medieval fabrication by European monks.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  23. @guy
    I noticed that if you suggest that the varangians of kievan rus were swedes, both ukrainians and russians get angry. Is svidomism like your example basically a calmer extension of the balkan/indian/turkish flame war propaganda?

    I noticed that if you suggest that the varangians of kievan rus were swedes, both ukrainians and russians get angry.

    For Ukraine will not say, but in Russia the fact that varangians were vikings is quite generally accepted. This is not only written in the textbooks, but also it is common place historical novels, movies, etc.

    Read More
    • Replies: @guy
    I would downplay it a bit from the viking conquest narrative, because the varangians had substantial support from the ilmen slavs and ingrians in the north and kryvich slavs in the south since they were able to organize against the khazars, maintain trade routes, and organize very successful raiding expeditions.
    , @AP

    For Ukraine will not say, but in Russia the fact that varangians were vikings is quite generally accepted
     
    True, as is also true of Ukrainians usually, but both Russian and Ukrainians exaggerate how early the Varangians were Slavicized, and then argue with each other about whether these dubiously Slavicized Vikings were Russians or Ukrainians.

    For example, there is Yaroslav the Wise (aka Jarisleif the Lame in the Norse sagas).

    His mother was the Scandinavian woman Ragnhild, his father Vladimir - himself probably fully Scandinavian but perhaps half-Scandinavian (Vladimir's father was fully Scandinavian, there is controversy about whether Vladimir's mother was Scandinavian Malfried or Slavic Malusha though the former is suggested to be more likely). Jarisleif, whose power base involved Scandinavian troops, married Ingegerd Olofsdotter, the daughter of Sweden's king. What language do you think they spoke to each other and to their children?

    Jarisleif has been featured on currencies and monuments in both Ukraine and Russia. It's like a Mayan in Mexico and an Afro-Cuban each claiming that Hernan Cortes was one of their own.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  24. @ussr andy
    Russia had Fomenkoism (two main theses, iirc - the mongols were us and we wuz gypshuns), but it was more of a pseudo-historic crankery, like ancient astronauts, than anything political.

    Sure, and who is the most well known proponent of Fomenkoism? Crazed Russophobe neocon Kasparov.

    Read More
    • Replies: @ussr andy
    It always seemed fishy to me, especially the gypshuns thing which is a parallel with Afro-Centrism. And it's not like Russian history wasn't glorious enough on its own.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  25. @melanf

    I noticed that if you suggest that the varangians of kievan rus were swedes, both ukrainians and russians get angry.
     
    For Ukraine will not say, but in Russia the fact that varangians were vikings is quite generally accepted. This is not only written in the textbooks, but also it is common place historical novels, movies, etc.

    I would downplay it a bit from the viking conquest narrative, because the varangians had substantial support from the ilmen slavs and ingrians in the north and kryvich slavs in the south since they were able to organize against the khazars, maintain trade routes, and organize very successful raiding expeditions.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  26. @Anatoly Karlin
    Sure, and who is the most well known proponent of Fomenkoism? Crazed Russophobe neocon Kasparov.

    It always seemed fishy to me, especially the gypshuns thing which is a parallel with Afro-Centrism. And it’s not like Russian history wasn’t glorious enough on its own.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  27. @melanf

    I noticed that if you suggest that the varangians of kievan rus were swedes, both ukrainians and russians get angry.
     
    For Ukraine will not say, but in Russia the fact that varangians were vikings is quite generally accepted. This is not only written in the textbooks, but also it is common place historical novels, movies, etc.

    For Ukraine will not say, but in Russia the fact that varangians were vikings is quite generally accepted

    True, as is also true of Ukrainians usually, but both Russian and Ukrainians exaggerate how early the Varangians were Slavicized, and then argue with each other about whether these dubiously Slavicized Vikings were Russians or Ukrainians.

    For example, there is Yaroslav the Wise (aka Jarisleif the Lame in the Norse sagas).

    His mother was the Scandinavian woman Ragnhild, his father Vladimir – himself probably fully Scandinavian but perhaps half-Scandinavian (Vladimir’s father was fully Scandinavian, there is controversy about whether Vladimir’s mother was Scandinavian Malfried or Slavic Malusha though the former is suggested to be more likely). Jarisleif, whose power base involved Scandinavian troops, married Ingegerd Olofsdotter, the daughter of Sweden’s king. What language do you think they spoke to each other and to their children?

    Jarisleif has been featured on currencies and monuments in both Ukraine and Russia. It’s like a Mayan in Mexico and an Afro-Cuban each claiming that Hernan Cortes was one of their own.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Felix Keverich
    That's a stupid argument to make, frankly. Romanov dynasty in late Imperial Russia was ethnically German. This does not mean that Russia did not exist. Nicholas II, despite having like 1/16 of Russian blood in him, was still very much a Russian Tsar.

    It's also worth mentioning that the vikings established a number of European dynasties, including the House of Normandy, which later came to rule medeval England. This does not mean that William the Conqueror was a 'Swede'. The English have every right to claim him as their own.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  28. @CK
    Any death that does not involve multiple screaming orgasms and various extravagant sexual activities; and/or multiple participants is a " bad way to die."
    To paraphrase V for Vendetta, A death without chocolate syrup and whipped...
    cream; is a death not worth having.

    “Any death that does not involve multiple screaming orgasms and various extravagant sexual activities … ”

    Ah, CK – you are a man (or woman, or beast) after my own heart! Well, the heart I had thirty and more years ago …

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  29. @AP

    For Ukraine will not say, but in Russia the fact that varangians were vikings is quite generally accepted
     
    True, as is also true of Ukrainians usually, but both Russian and Ukrainians exaggerate how early the Varangians were Slavicized, and then argue with each other about whether these dubiously Slavicized Vikings were Russians or Ukrainians.

    For example, there is Yaroslav the Wise (aka Jarisleif the Lame in the Norse sagas).

    His mother was the Scandinavian woman Ragnhild, his father Vladimir - himself probably fully Scandinavian but perhaps half-Scandinavian (Vladimir's father was fully Scandinavian, there is controversy about whether Vladimir's mother was Scandinavian Malfried or Slavic Malusha though the former is suggested to be more likely). Jarisleif, whose power base involved Scandinavian troops, married Ingegerd Olofsdotter, the daughter of Sweden's king. What language do you think they spoke to each other and to their children?

    Jarisleif has been featured on currencies and monuments in both Ukraine and Russia. It's like a Mayan in Mexico and an Afro-Cuban each claiming that Hernan Cortes was one of their own.

    That’s a stupid argument to make, frankly. Romanov dynasty in late Imperial Russia was ethnically German. This does not mean that Russia did not exist. Nicholas II, despite having like 1/16 of Russian blood in him, was still very much a Russian Tsar.

    It’s also worth mentioning that the vikings established a number of European dynasties, including the House of Normandy, which later came to rule medeval England. This does not mean that William the Conqueror was a ‘Swede’. The English have every right to claim him as their own.

    Read More
    • Replies: @AP
    (this was supposed to have been a reply, so I'm reposting)

    Romanov dynasty in late Imperial Russia was ethnically German. This does not mean that Russia did not exist. Nicholas II, despite having like 1/16 of Russian blood in him, was still very much a Russian Tsar.
     
    Enter the Russian nationalist myth-believer, just as silly as a Ukrainian one.

    Romanovs were originally a Russian dynasty, who over the centuries mixed with non-Russian aristocrats who adopted the Russian faith and language with marriage. Rurikids were Scandinavians, who kept a rather pure Scandinavian bloodline (among the rulers of Kiev, at least) almost into the 12th century - the last "pure-blooded" Scandinavian prince of Kiev, Vissivald (Vsevolod) died in 1093 (his successor was half-Scandinavian and half-Greek). While there were a lot of Baltic Germans in the Russian military and bureaucracy, “German” Romanovs didn’t mostly depend on German military units and weren’t seizing the throne with German troops. AFAIK they didn’t employ German nannies and teachers sent from Germany to maintain a German identity, either, as did Rurikids.

    It’s also worth mentioning that the vikings established a number of European dynasties, including the House of Normandy, which later came to rule medeval England. This does not mean that William the Conqueror was a ‘Swede’.
     
    Normans spoke a French dialect, not Norse. Unlike the Rurikids, the Vikings who ruled Normandy seemed to have mixed with the locals extensively. William the Conqueror may have been only 1/8 Viking. He’s considered a Norman king of England, not an Englishman.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  30. AP says:

    Romanov dynasty in late Imperial Russia was ethnically German. This does not mean that Russia did not exist. Nicholas II, despite having like 1/16 of Russian blood in him, was still very much a Russian Tsar.

    Enter the Russian nationalist myth-believer, just as silly as a Ukrainian one.

    Romanovs were originally a Russian dynasty, who over the centuries mixed with non-Russian aristocrats who adopted the Russian faith and language with marriage. Rurikids were Scandinavians, who kept a rather pure Scandinavian bloodline (among the rulers of Kiev, at least) almost into the 12th century. While there were a lot of Baltic Germans in the Russian military and bureaucracy, “German” Romanovs didn’t mostly depend on German military units and weren’t seizing the throne with German troops. AFAIK they didn’t employ German nannies and teachers sent from Germany to maintain a German identity, either, as did Rurikids.

    It’s also worth mentioning that the vikings established a number of European dynasties, including the House of Normandy, which later came to rule medeval England. This does not mean that William the Conqueror was a ‘Swede’.

    Normans were French-speaking. Unlike the Rurikids, the Vikings who ruled Normandy seemed to have mixed with the locals extensively. William the Conqueror may have been only 1/8 Viking. He’s considered a Norman king of England, not an Englishman.

    Read More
    • Replies: @5371
    Absurd. You have no idea what nannies and teachers the rulers of ancient Russia used. What you think you know about most of their marriages and the military units they depended on ain't so.
    , @melanf

    Romanovs were originally a Russian dynasty, who over the centuries mixed with non-Russian aristocrats who adopted the Russian faith and language with marriage. Rurikids were Scandinavians, who kept a rather pure Scandinavian bloodline (among the rulers of Kiev, at least) almost into the 12th century. While there were a lot of Baltic Germans in the Russian military and bureaucracy, “German” Romanovs didn’t mostly depend on German military units and weren’t seizing the throne with German troops.
     
    In respect of Yaroslav the Wise, this is a ridiculous argument. Yaroslav came to power based on the Novgorod army. One of the episodes of that era - in the year 1015, the inhabitants of Novgorod massacred Scandinavian mercenaries of Yaroslav. Yaroslav in retaliation lured to a feast and massacred the Novgorod aristocracy. However, after that Yaroslav was forced to beg forgiveness from the residents of Novgorod.

    As for Scandinavian/Slav - obviously the princes who give for their children Slavic names, did not consider themselves Scandinavians. Their "biological" origin is irrelevant
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  31. AP says:
    @Felix Keverich
    That's a stupid argument to make, frankly. Romanov dynasty in late Imperial Russia was ethnically German. This does not mean that Russia did not exist. Nicholas II, despite having like 1/16 of Russian blood in him, was still very much a Russian Tsar.

    It's also worth mentioning that the vikings established a number of European dynasties, including the House of Normandy, which later came to rule medeval England. This does not mean that William the Conqueror was a 'Swede'. The English have every right to claim him as their own.

    (this was supposed to have been a reply, so I’m reposting)

    Romanov dynasty in late Imperial Russia was ethnically German. This does not mean that Russia did not exist. Nicholas II, despite having like 1/16 of Russian blood in him, was still very much a Russian Tsar.

    Enter the Russian nationalist myth-believer, just as silly as a Ukrainian one.

    Romanovs were originally a Russian dynasty, who over the centuries mixed with non-Russian aristocrats who adopted the Russian faith and language with marriage. Rurikids were Scandinavians, who kept a rather pure Scandinavian bloodline (among the rulers of Kiev, at least) almost into the 12th century – the last “pure-blooded” Scandinavian prince of Kiev, Vissivald (Vsevolod) died in 1093 (his successor was half-Scandinavian and half-Greek). While there were a lot of Baltic Germans in the Russian military and bureaucracy, “German” Romanovs didn’t mostly depend on German military units and weren’t seizing the throne with German troops. AFAIK they didn’t employ German nannies and teachers sent from Germany to maintain a German identity, either, as did Rurikids.

    It’s also worth mentioning that the vikings established a number of European dynasties, including the House of Normandy, which later came to rule medeval England. This does not mean that William the Conqueror was a ‘Swede’.

    Normans spoke a French dialect, not Norse. Unlike the Rurikids, the Vikings who ruled Normandy seemed to have mixed with the locals extensively. William the Conqueror may have been only 1/8 Viking. He’s considered a Norman king of England, not an Englishman.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  32. @AP

    Romanov dynasty in late Imperial Russia was ethnically German. This does not mean that Russia did not exist. Nicholas II, despite having like 1/16 of Russian blood in him, was still very much a Russian Tsar.
     
    Enter the Russian nationalist myth-believer, just as silly as a Ukrainian one.

    Romanovs were originally a Russian dynasty, who over the centuries mixed with non-Russian aristocrats who adopted the Russian faith and language with marriage. Rurikids were Scandinavians, who kept a rather pure Scandinavian bloodline (among the rulers of Kiev, at least) almost into the 12th century. While there were a lot of Baltic Germans in the Russian military and bureaucracy, "German" Romanovs didn't mostly depend on German military units and weren't seizing the throne with German troops. AFAIK they didn't employ German nannies and teachers sent from Germany to maintain a German identity, either, as did Rurikids.

    It’s also worth mentioning that the vikings established a number of European dynasties, including the House of Normandy, which later came to rule medeval England. This does not mean that William the Conqueror was a ‘Swede’.
     
    Normans were French-speaking. Unlike the Rurikids, the Vikings who ruled Normandy seemed to have mixed with the locals extensively. William the Conqueror may have been only 1/8 Viking. He's considered a Norman king of England, not an Englishman.

    Absurd. You have no idea what nannies and teachers the rulers of ancient Russia used. What you think you know about most of their marriages and the military units they depended on ain’t so.

    Read More
    • Replies: @AP

    You have no idea what nannies and teachers the rulers of ancient Russia used.
     
    "Ancient Russia" - Russian svidomism at its best.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sviatoslav_I_of_Kiev

    "Sviatoslav was tutored by a Varangian named Asmud.[10] The tradition of employing Varangian tutors for the sons of ruling princes survived well into the 11th century."

    What you think you know about most of their marriages and the military units they depended on ain’t so.
     
    So Vladimir didn't go into exile to Norway, didn't gather a group of Norse warriors, and didn't seize the Kievan thrown with those Norse warriors?

    And Yaroslav didn't also seize the throne with an army whose core consisted of Scandinavian warriors under Eymund and Ragnar?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  33. AP says:
    @5371
    Absurd. You have no idea what nannies and teachers the rulers of ancient Russia used. What you think you know about most of their marriages and the military units they depended on ain't so.

    You have no idea what nannies and teachers the rulers of ancient Russia used.

    “Ancient Russia” – Russian svidomism at its best.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sviatoslav_I_of_Kiev

    “Sviatoslav was tutored by a Varangian named Asmud.[10] The tradition of employing Varangian tutors for the sons of ruling princes survived well into the 11th century.”

    What you think you know about most of their marriages and the military units they depended on ain’t so.

    So Vladimir didn’t go into exile to Norway, didn’t gather a group of Norse warriors, and didn’t seize the Kievan thrown with those Norse warriors?

    And Yaroslav didn’t also seize the throne with an army whose core consisted of Scandinavian warriors under Eymund and Ragnar?

    Read More
    • Replies: @5371
    Ancient Russia it was, just as we speak of France, not Gaul, already from the sixth century. If you consult a full genealogy of the Rurikid dynasty, you will see that marriages to Scandinavians early became a small minority of all those contracted. Even those owed their existence probably to the fact that it would have been imprudent to marry otherwise than among outside potentates, rather than a particular attachment to Scandinavia.
    , @melanf

    So Vladimir didn’t go into exile to Norway, didn’t gather a group of Norse warriors, and didn’t seize the Kievan thrown with those Norse warriors?
     
    Is this a joke? Vladimir was never in Norway. But four of the Norwegian king, was at different times in exile in "Ancient Russia"
    , @Anatoly Karlin

    “Ancient Russia” – Russian svidomism at its best.
     
    Ancient Russia (Древняя Русь) is an absolutely uncontroversial term (and more accurate than "Kievan Rus," which was a late 19th century literary/historiographic invention), though yes, it doesn't translate all that well into English, hence why I usually go with "medieval Russia."
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  34. @AP

    You have no idea what nannies and teachers the rulers of ancient Russia used.
     
    "Ancient Russia" - Russian svidomism at its best.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sviatoslav_I_of_Kiev

    "Sviatoslav was tutored by a Varangian named Asmud.[10] The tradition of employing Varangian tutors for the sons of ruling princes survived well into the 11th century."

    What you think you know about most of their marriages and the military units they depended on ain’t so.
     
    So Vladimir didn't go into exile to Norway, didn't gather a group of Norse warriors, and didn't seize the Kievan thrown with those Norse warriors?

    And Yaroslav didn't also seize the throne with an army whose core consisted of Scandinavian warriors under Eymund and Ragnar?

    Ancient Russia it was, just as we speak of France, not Gaul, already from the sixth century. If you consult a full genealogy of the Rurikid dynasty, you will see that marriages to Scandinavians early became a small minority of all those contracted. Even those owed their existence probably to the fact that it would have been imprudent to marry otherwise than among outside potentates, rather than a particular attachment to Scandinavia.

    Read More
    • Replies: @AP

    Ancient Russia it was, just as we speak of France, not Gaul, already from the sixth century.
     
    Actually nowadays "Ancient France" is usually and more accurately referred to as the Frankish Kingdom, Frankia, etc. France begins later. Britannica, I suppose, represents modern consensus:

    Emergence of France

    "From the 9th to the 11th century the peoples and lands dominated by western Frankish kings were transformed. The Carolingian protectorate of local order collapsed under the pressures of external invasions and internal usurpations of power. Growing populations and quickening economies were reorganized in principalities whose leaders struggled to carry on the old programs of kings, bishops, and monks; one of these lands, centred on the Paris-Orléans axis and later known as the Île-de-France, was the nucleus of a new dynastic kingdom of France. This kingdom may be spoken of as Capetian France (the first king of the new dynasty having been Hugh Capet), but it was not until the 13th century that this France came to approximate the modern nation in territorial extent. The emergence of a greater France as a social and cultural entity preceded the political expansion of Capetian France; already in the 12th century Crusaders, when speaking of “Franks” from Romance-speaking lands, meant something like “Frenchmen,” while the persistence of old boundaries between populations of Romance and Germanic speech perpetuated the idea of a greater West Frankland."

    French thinking of the Germanic Frankish warrior chieftain Karl as an ancient "Frenchman" is also a form of svidomism.

    If you consult a full genealogy of the Rurikid dynasty, you will see that marriages to Scandinavians early became a small minority of all those contracted.
     
    Sure, but the actual princes of Kiev, the rulers of the state, maintained a pure Scandinavian bloodline up to Vissivald/Vsevolod, who ruled from 1078-1093. Vladimir, for example, had numerous wives, some of whom were not Scandinavians, but his successor after a period of warfare ended up being his son by Ragnhild of Polotsk.

    Rurik came over in around 860. Having rulers who hadn't been mixed with non-Scandinavians for 200 years is an impressive feat.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  35. @AP

    Romanov dynasty in late Imperial Russia was ethnically German. This does not mean that Russia did not exist. Nicholas II, despite having like 1/16 of Russian blood in him, was still very much a Russian Tsar.
     
    Enter the Russian nationalist myth-believer, just as silly as a Ukrainian one.

    Romanovs were originally a Russian dynasty, who over the centuries mixed with non-Russian aristocrats who adopted the Russian faith and language with marriage. Rurikids were Scandinavians, who kept a rather pure Scandinavian bloodline (among the rulers of Kiev, at least) almost into the 12th century. While there were a lot of Baltic Germans in the Russian military and bureaucracy, "German" Romanovs didn't mostly depend on German military units and weren't seizing the throne with German troops. AFAIK they didn't employ German nannies and teachers sent from Germany to maintain a German identity, either, as did Rurikids.

    It’s also worth mentioning that the vikings established a number of European dynasties, including the House of Normandy, which later came to rule medeval England. This does not mean that William the Conqueror was a ‘Swede’.
     
    Normans were French-speaking. Unlike the Rurikids, the Vikings who ruled Normandy seemed to have mixed with the locals extensively. William the Conqueror may have been only 1/8 Viking. He's considered a Norman king of England, not an Englishman.

    Romanovs were originally a Russian dynasty, who over the centuries mixed with non-Russian aristocrats who adopted the Russian faith and language with marriage. Rurikids were Scandinavians, who kept a rather pure Scandinavian bloodline (among the rulers of Kiev, at least) almost into the 12th century. While there were a lot of Baltic Germans in the Russian military and bureaucracy, “German” Romanovs didn’t mostly depend on German military units and weren’t seizing the throne with German troops.

    In respect of Yaroslav the Wise, this is a ridiculous argument. Yaroslav came to power based on the Novgorod army. One of the episodes of that era – in the year 1015, the inhabitants of Novgorod massacred Scandinavian mercenaries of Yaroslav. Yaroslav in retaliation lured to a feast and massacred the Novgorod aristocracy. However, after that Yaroslav was forced to beg forgiveness from the residents of Novgorod.

    As for Scandinavian/Slav – obviously the princes who give for their children Slavic names, did not consider themselves Scandinavians. Their “biological” origin is irrelevant

    Read More
    • Replies: @AP
    The Russian svidomists have mobilized.

    In respect of Yaroslav the Wise, this is a ridiculous argument. Yaroslav came to power based on the Novgorod army. One of the episodes of that era – in the year 1015, the inhabitants of Novgorod massacred Scandinavian mercenaries of Yaroslav. Yaroslav in retaliation lured to a feast and massacred the Novgorod aristocracy. However, after that Yaroslav was forced to beg forgiveness from the residents of Novgorod.
     
    So the pure Scandinavian Yaroslav, massacred Slavs who had dared to kill Yaroslav's Scandinavian allies, and later married a Swedish princes, and Yaroslav is a Russian Slav. Priceless.

    Britannica states "Yaroslav, with the active support of the Novgorodians and the help of Varangian (Viking) mercenaries, defeated Svyatopolk and became the grand prince of Kiev in 1019."

    Yaroslav continued to depend on Norse warriors from Scandinavia, such as Jakun:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yakun

    As for Scandinavian/Slav – obviously the princes who give for their children Slavic names, did not consider themselves Scandinavians. Their “biological” origin is irrelevant

     

    Well, one of these Scandinavians with a Slavic name, Vladimir, lived in Norway and gathered an army there with which he seized the Kievan throne. I guess he didn't consider himself a Scandinavian but a Slav, right? Speaking of which -

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Waldemar

    Valdemar I of Denmark or Waldemar the Great (1131–1182)
    Valdemar II of Denmark or Waldemar the Victorious (1170–1241)
    Valdemar the Young (1209–1231)
    Valdemar III of Denmark (1314–1364)
    Waldemar I, Prince of Anhalt-Zerbst (d. 1368)
    Waldemar II, Prince of Anhalt-Zerbst (d. 1371)
    Valdemar IV of Denmark or Waldemar Otherday (c. 1320–1375)
    Waldemar III, Prince of Anhalt-Zerbst (d. 1391)
    Valdemar of Denmark (bishop) (1157/1158–1235 or 1236)
    Prince Valdemar of Denmark (1858–1939)
    Waldemar, Margrave of Brandenburg-Stendal or Waldemar the Great (c. 1280–1319)
    Prince Waldemar of Prussia (1868–1879), son of Emperor Frederick III
    Prince Waldemar of Prussia (1889–1945), son of Prince Henry
    Woldemar, Prince of Lippe (1824–1895)

    And don't forget Valdemar, King of Sweden (1250–1275).

    All of these were Ancient Russians because their name, right? :-)
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  36. @AP

    You have no idea what nannies and teachers the rulers of ancient Russia used.
     
    "Ancient Russia" - Russian svidomism at its best.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sviatoslav_I_of_Kiev

    "Sviatoslav was tutored by a Varangian named Asmud.[10] The tradition of employing Varangian tutors for the sons of ruling princes survived well into the 11th century."

    What you think you know about most of their marriages and the military units they depended on ain’t so.
     
    So Vladimir didn't go into exile to Norway, didn't gather a group of Norse warriors, and didn't seize the Kievan thrown with those Norse warriors?

    And Yaroslav didn't also seize the throne with an army whose core consisted of Scandinavian warriors under Eymund and Ragnar?

    So Vladimir didn’t go into exile to Norway, didn’t gather a group of Norse warriors, and didn’t seize the Kievan thrown with those Norse warriors?

    Is this a joke? Vladimir was never in Norway. But four of the Norwegian king, was at different times in exile in “Ancient Russia”

    Read More
    • Replies: @AP

    "So Vladimir didn’t go into exile to Norway, didn’t gather a group of Norse warriors, and didn’t seize the Kievan thrown with those Norse warriors?"

    Is this a joke? Vladimir was never in Norway.
     
    I see that Russian svidomism has met reality and disapproves.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vladimir_the_Great

    After Sviatoslav's death at the hands of the Pechenegs in 972, a fratricidal war erupted in 976 between Yaropolk and his younger brother Oleg, ruler of the Drevlians. In 977, Vladimir fled to his kinsman Haakon Sigurdsson, ruler of Norway, collecting as many Norse warriors as he could to assist him to recover Novgorod.

    Russian wiki is less specific:

    Владимир при этом известии бежал в варяжские земли. Всей Русью стал править Ярополк Святославич.

    Тем временем, Владимир «за морем» набрал с Добрыней войско и в 980 году вернулся в Новгород, выгнав посадника Ярополка

    That's right, a Scandinavian ruler, moves to Norway, gathers around himself Norse warriors with whom he seizes the throne, is an Ancient Russian Slav.

    But four of the Norwegian king, was at different times in exile in “Ancient Russia”
     
    Since the state they exiled themselves to was run by fellow Scandinavians this is natural.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  37. AP says:
    @5371
    Ancient Russia it was, just as we speak of France, not Gaul, already from the sixth century. If you consult a full genealogy of the Rurikid dynasty, you will see that marriages to Scandinavians early became a small minority of all those contracted. Even those owed their existence probably to the fact that it would have been imprudent to marry otherwise than among outside potentates, rather than a particular attachment to Scandinavia.

    Ancient Russia it was, just as we speak of France, not Gaul, already from the sixth century.

    Actually nowadays “Ancient France” is usually and more accurately referred to as the Frankish Kingdom, Frankia, etc. France begins later. Britannica, I suppose, represents modern consensus:

    Emergence of France

    “From the 9th to the 11th century the peoples and lands dominated by western Frankish kings were transformed. The Carolingian protectorate of local order collapsed under the pressures of external invasions and internal usurpations of power. Growing populations and quickening economies were reorganized in principalities whose leaders struggled to carry on the old programs of kings, bishops, and monks; one of these lands, centred on the Paris-Orléans axis and later known as the Île-de-France, was the nucleus of a new dynastic kingdom of France. This kingdom may be spoken of as Capetian France (the first king of the new dynasty having been Hugh Capet), but it was not until the 13th century that this France came to approximate the modern nation in territorial extent. The emergence of a greater France as a social and cultural entity preceded the political expansion of Capetian France; already in the 12th century Crusaders, when speaking of “Franks” from Romance-speaking lands, meant something like “Frenchmen,” while the persistence of old boundaries between populations of Romance and Germanic speech perpetuated the idea of a greater West Frankland.”

    French thinking of the Germanic Frankish warrior chieftain Karl as an ancient “Frenchman” is also a form of svidomism.

    If you consult a full genealogy of the Rurikid dynasty, you will see that marriages to Scandinavians early became a small minority of all those contracted.

    Sure, but the actual princes of Kiev, the rulers of the state, maintained a pure Scandinavian bloodline up to Vissivald/Vsevolod, who ruled from 1078-1093. Vladimir, for example, had numerous wives, some of whom were not Scandinavians, but his successor after a period of warfare ended up being his son by Ragnhild of Polotsk.

    Rurik came over in around 860. Having rulers who hadn’t been mixed with non-Scandinavians for 200 years is an impressive feat.

    Read More
    • Replies: @melanf

    Sure, but the actual princes of Kiev, the rulers of the state, maintained a pure Scandinavian bloodline up to Vissivald/Vsevolod, who ruled from 1078-1093. Vladimir, for example, had numerous wives, some of whom were not Scandinavians, but his successor after a period of warfare ended up being his son by Ragnhild of Polotsk.
     
    It happened because all brothers of Yaroslav (Vladimir successor ) were killed, or died. The ethnic origin of the mother for the inheritance had absolutely nothing
    , @melanf
    By the way co-ruler Yaroslav was his elder brother Mstislav (from another mother). Yaroslav tried to get rid of Mstislav, but Mstislav's Ossetian troops utterly defeated the Scandinavian mercenaries of Yaroslav in 1024
    , @5371
    Clovis was the first king of France. I have no idea how anyone could consider this statement controversial. And yes, he and Charlemagne spoke German, just as kings of England from William I to Edward III spoke French. The Qianlong emperor was Manchu, but it would be ridiculous to deny that he was also Chinese.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  38. @AP

    You have no idea what nannies and teachers the rulers of ancient Russia used.
     
    "Ancient Russia" - Russian svidomism at its best.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sviatoslav_I_of_Kiev

    "Sviatoslav was tutored by a Varangian named Asmud.[10] The tradition of employing Varangian tutors for the sons of ruling princes survived well into the 11th century."

    What you think you know about most of their marriages and the military units they depended on ain’t so.
     
    So Vladimir didn't go into exile to Norway, didn't gather a group of Norse warriors, and didn't seize the Kievan thrown with those Norse warriors?

    And Yaroslav didn't also seize the throne with an army whose core consisted of Scandinavian warriors under Eymund and Ragnar?

    “Ancient Russia” – Russian svidomism at its best.

    Ancient Russia (Древняя Русь) is an absolutely uncontroversial term (and more accurate than “Kievan Rus,” which was a late 19th century literary/historiographic invention), though yes, it doesn’t translate all that well into English, hence why I usually go with “medieval Russia.”

    Read More
    • Replies: @AP

    Ancient Russia (Древняя Русь) is an absolutely uncontroversial term
     
    It's only accurate as a geographic term, as one would refer to Gaul as ancient France. Implying that the state and its rulers was a Russian one understood in the modern ethnic sense, and its rulers were Russians (at least, up to the time of Yaroslav), is svidomist fantasy which, as we see here, is quite common among Russians.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  39. AP says:
    @melanf

    Romanovs were originally a Russian dynasty, who over the centuries mixed with non-Russian aristocrats who adopted the Russian faith and language with marriage. Rurikids were Scandinavians, who kept a rather pure Scandinavian bloodline (among the rulers of Kiev, at least) almost into the 12th century. While there were a lot of Baltic Germans in the Russian military and bureaucracy, “German” Romanovs didn’t mostly depend on German military units and weren’t seizing the throne with German troops.
     
    In respect of Yaroslav the Wise, this is a ridiculous argument. Yaroslav came to power based on the Novgorod army. One of the episodes of that era - in the year 1015, the inhabitants of Novgorod massacred Scandinavian mercenaries of Yaroslav. Yaroslav in retaliation lured to a feast and massacred the Novgorod aristocracy. However, after that Yaroslav was forced to beg forgiveness from the residents of Novgorod.

    As for Scandinavian/Slav - obviously the princes who give for their children Slavic names, did not consider themselves Scandinavians. Their "biological" origin is irrelevant

    The Russian svidomists have mobilized.

    In respect of Yaroslav the Wise, this is a ridiculous argument. Yaroslav came to power based on the Novgorod army. One of the episodes of that era – in the year 1015, the inhabitants of Novgorod massacred Scandinavian mercenaries of Yaroslav. Yaroslav in retaliation lured to a feast and massacred the Novgorod aristocracy. However, after that Yaroslav was forced to beg forgiveness from the residents of Novgorod.

    So the pure Scandinavian Yaroslav, massacred Slavs who had dared to kill Yaroslav’s Scandinavian allies, and later married a Swedish princes, and Yaroslav is a Russian Slav. Priceless.

    Britannica states “Yaroslav, with the active support of the Novgorodians and the help of Varangian (Viking) mercenaries, defeated Svyatopolk and became the grand prince of Kiev in 1019.”

    Yaroslav continued to depend on Norse warriors from Scandinavia, such as Jakun:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yakun

    As for Scandinavian/Slav – obviously the princes who give for their children Slavic names, did not consider themselves Scandinavians. Their “biological” origin is irrelevant

    Well, one of these Scandinavians with a Slavic name, Vladimir, lived in Norway and gathered an army there with which he seized the Kievan throne. I guess he didn’t consider himself a Scandinavian but a Slav, right? Speaking of which –

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Waldemar

    Valdemar I of Denmark or Waldemar the Great (1131–1182)
    Valdemar II of Denmark or Waldemar the Victorious (1170–1241)
    Valdemar the Young (1209–1231)
    Valdemar III of Denmark (1314–1364)
    Waldemar I, Prince of Anhalt-Zerbst (d. 1368)
    Waldemar II, Prince of Anhalt-Zerbst (d. 1371)
    Valdemar IV of Denmark or Waldemar Otherday (c. 1320–1375)
    Waldemar III, Prince of Anhalt-Zerbst (d. 1391)
    Valdemar of Denmark (bishop) (1157/1158–1235 or 1236)
    Prince Valdemar of Denmark (1858–1939)
    Waldemar, Margrave of Brandenburg-Stendal or Waldemar the Great (c. 1280–1319)
    Prince Waldemar of Prussia (1868–1879), son of Emperor Frederick III
    Prince Waldemar of Prussia (1889–1945), son of Prince Henry
    Woldemar, Prince of Lippe (1824–1895)

    And don’t forget Valdemar, King of Sweden (1250–1275).

    All of these were Ancient Russians because their name, right? :-)

    Read More
    • Replies: @melanf

    As for Scandinavian/Slav – obviously the princes who give for their children Slavic names, did not consider themselves Scandinavians. Their “biological” origin is irrelevant
     

    Well, one of these Scandinavians with a Slavic name, Vladimir, lived in Norway and gathered an army there with which he seized the Kievan throne. I guess he didn’t consider himself a Scandinavian but a Slav, right? Speaking of which –
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Waldemar
    Valdemar I of Denmark or Waldemar the Great (1131–1182)
    Valdemar II of Denmark or Waldemar the Victorious (1170–1241).....All of these were Ancient Russians because their name, right?

     

    Prince Igor (son of Rurik) had a son Svyatoslav (Slavic name)


    Prince Svyatoslav's sons:
    Yaropolk (Slavic name);
    Oleg (Scandinavian name);
    Vladimir (a Slavic name)

    The throne was inherited by Vladimir, who gave his daughters and sons the following names:

    Vycheslav,
    Svyatopolk,
    Izyaslav,
    Mstislav,
    Jaroslav
    Vsevolod,
    Predslava,
    Premyslova,
    Mstislav,
    Stanislav,
    Sudislav,
    Svyatoslav,
    Boris,
    Gleb,
    Pozvizd,
    Dobronega

    The only Scandinavian name is Gleb. The other names are Slavonic (the name Boris is Turkish, but are borrowed from the Slavs, the Bulgarians). Please give an example of a dynasty of Scandinavian rulers, who in three generations give their children Slavic names. Or give an example of a Scandinavian king, which had 16 children, but only one son with Scandinavian name

    For the rest of your thesis, detailed answer tomorrow evening, no time now
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  40. AP says:
    @melanf

    So Vladimir didn’t go into exile to Norway, didn’t gather a group of Norse warriors, and didn’t seize the Kievan thrown with those Norse warriors?
     
    Is this a joke? Vladimir was never in Norway. But four of the Norwegian king, was at different times in exile in "Ancient Russia"

    “So Vladimir didn’t go into exile to Norway, didn’t gather a group of Norse warriors, and didn’t seize the Kievan thrown with those Norse warriors?”

    Is this a joke? Vladimir was never in Norway.

    I see that Russian svidomism has met reality and disapproves.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vladimir_the_Great

    After Sviatoslav’s death at the hands of the Pechenegs in 972, a fratricidal war erupted in 976 between Yaropolk and his younger brother Oleg, ruler of the Drevlians. In 977, Vladimir fled to his kinsman Haakon Sigurdsson, ruler of Norway, collecting as many Norse warriors as he could to assist him to recover Novgorod.

    Russian wiki is less specific:

    Владимир при этом известии бежал в варяжские земли. Всей Русью стал править Ярополк Святославич.

    Тем временем, Владимир «за морем» набрал с Добрыней войско и в 980 году вернулся в Новгород, выгнав посадника Ярополка

    That’s right, a Scandinavian ruler, moves to Norway, gathers around himself Norse warriors with whom he seizes the throne, is an Ancient Russian Slav.

    But four of the Norwegian king, was at different times in exile in “Ancient Russia”

    Since the state they exiled themselves to was run by fellow Scandinavians this is natural.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  41. AP says:
    @Anatoly Karlin

    “Ancient Russia” – Russian svidomism at its best.
     
    Ancient Russia (Древняя Русь) is an absolutely uncontroversial term (and more accurate than "Kievan Rus," which was a late 19th century literary/historiographic invention), though yes, it doesn't translate all that well into English, hence why I usually go with "medieval Russia."

    Ancient Russia (Древняя Русь) is an absolutely uncontroversial term

    It’s only accurate as a geographic term, as one would refer to Gaul as ancient France. Implying that the state and its rulers was a Russian one understood in the modern ethnic sense, and its rulers were Russians (at least, up to the time of Yaroslav), is svidomist fantasy which, as we see here, is quite common among Russians.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  42. @AP

    Ancient Russia it was, just as we speak of France, not Gaul, already from the sixth century.
     
    Actually nowadays "Ancient France" is usually and more accurately referred to as the Frankish Kingdom, Frankia, etc. France begins later. Britannica, I suppose, represents modern consensus:

    Emergence of France

    "From the 9th to the 11th century the peoples and lands dominated by western Frankish kings were transformed. The Carolingian protectorate of local order collapsed under the pressures of external invasions and internal usurpations of power. Growing populations and quickening economies were reorganized in principalities whose leaders struggled to carry on the old programs of kings, bishops, and monks; one of these lands, centred on the Paris-Orléans axis and later known as the Île-de-France, was the nucleus of a new dynastic kingdom of France. This kingdom may be spoken of as Capetian France (the first king of the new dynasty having been Hugh Capet), but it was not until the 13th century that this France came to approximate the modern nation in territorial extent. The emergence of a greater France as a social and cultural entity preceded the political expansion of Capetian France; already in the 12th century Crusaders, when speaking of “Franks” from Romance-speaking lands, meant something like “Frenchmen,” while the persistence of old boundaries between populations of Romance and Germanic speech perpetuated the idea of a greater West Frankland."

    French thinking of the Germanic Frankish warrior chieftain Karl as an ancient "Frenchman" is also a form of svidomism.

    If you consult a full genealogy of the Rurikid dynasty, you will see that marriages to Scandinavians early became a small minority of all those contracted.
     
    Sure, but the actual princes of Kiev, the rulers of the state, maintained a pure Scandinavian bloodline up to Vissivald/Vsevolod, who ruled from 1078-1093. Vladimir, for example, had numerous wives, some of whom were not Scandinavians, but his successor after a period of warfare ended up being his son by Ragnhild of Polotsk.

    Rurik came over in around 860. Having rulers who hadn't been mixed with non-Scandinavians for 200 years is an impressive feat.

    Sure, but the actual princes of Kiev, the rulers of the state, maintained a pure Scandinavian bloodline up to Vissivald/Vsevolod, who ruled from 1078-1093. Vladimir, for example, had numerous wives, some of whom were not Scandinavians, but his successor after a period of warfare ended up being his son by Ragnhild of Polotsk.

    It happened because all brothers of Yaroslav (Vladimir successor ) were killed, or died. The ethnic origin of the mother for the inheritance had absolutely nothing

    Read More
    • Replies: @AP

    It happened because all brothers of Yaroslav (Vladimir successor ) were killed, or died. The ethnic origin of the mother for the inheritance had absolutely nothing
     
    Absolute coincidence that the rulers of Kiev had a basically pure Scandinavian bloodline for 200 years since Rurik came to those lands.

    The likely explanation is that having two Scandinavian parents probably made it easier for the products of such unions to deal with and gather Norse troops, which played a critical role in struggles for power, at least through the 11th century.

    This state of affairs demonstrates the ridiculousness of thinking of the state at that time as a Slavic (thus, Russian or Ukrainian) one though both Russian and Ukrainian svidomists claim that its rulers were Russians or Ukrainians. Helga (Olga) is the funniest example. Her husband (Ingvar/Igor) was killed and ambushed by Slavs from whom he was collecting tribute (furs, slaves, etc). She avenged her husband's death by completely slaughtering those Slavs, burning them all alive in their town. So the mass killer of Slavs becomes celebrated as a Slavic Queen. (is this not akin to Fomenko's ideas about Mongols being really "us"?)

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  43. @AP

    Ancient Russia it was, just as we speak of France, not Gaul, already from the sixth century.
     
    Actually nowadays "Ancient France" is usually and more accurately referred to as the Frankish Kingdom, Frankia, etc. France begins later. Britannica, I suppose, represents modern consensus:

    Emergence of France

    "From the 9th to the 11th century the peoples and lands dominated by western Frankish kings were transformed. The Carolingian protectorate of local order collapsed under the pressures of external invasions and internal usurpations of power. Growing populations and quickening economies were reorganized in principalities whose leaders struggled to carry on the old programs of kings, bishops, and monks; one of these lands, centred on the Paris-Orléans axis and later known as the Île-de-France, was the nucleus of a new dynastic kingdom of France. This kingdom may be spoken of as Capetian France (the first king of the new dynasty having been Hugh Capet), but it was not until the 13th century that this France came to approximate the modern nation in territorial extent. The emergence of a greater France as a social and cultural entity preceded the political expansion of Capetian France; already in the 12th century Crusaders, when speaking of “Franks” from Romance-speaking lands, meant something like “Frenchmen,” while the persistence of old boundaries between populations of Romance and Germanic speech perpetuated the idea of a greater West Frankland."

    French thinking of the Germanic Frankish warrior chieftain Karl as an ancient "Frenchman" is also a form of svidomism.

    If you consult a full genealogy of the Rurikid dynasty, you will see that marriages to Scandinavians early became a small minority of all those contracted.
     
    Sure, but the actual princes of Kiev, the rulers of the state, maintained a pure Scandinavian bloodline up to Vissivald/Vsevolod, who ruled from 1078-1093. Vladimir, for example, had numerous wives, some of whom were not Scandinavians, but his successor after a period of warfare ended up being his son by Ragnhild of Polotsk.

    Rurik came over in around 860. Having rulers who hadn't been mixed with non-Scandinavians for 200 years is an impressive feat.

    By the way co-ruler Yaroslav was his elder brother Mstislav (from another mother). Yaroslav tried to get rid of Mstislav, but Mstislav’s Ossetian troops utterly defeated the Scandinavian mercenaries of Yaroslav in 1024

    Read More
    • Replies: @AP

    By the way co-ruler Yaroslav was his elder brother Mstislav (from another mother).
     
    The origin of Mstslav's mother is unclear. The Russian historian Vernadsky states that Mstislav had the same Scandinavian mother as Yaroslav, other sources claim his mother was Czech.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  44. @melanf
    By the way co-ruler Yaroslav was his elder brother Mstislav (from another mother). Yaroslav tried to get rid of Mstislav, but Mstislav's Ossetian troops utterly defeated the Scandinavian mercenaries of Yaroslav in 1024

    By the way co-ruler Yaroslav was his elder brother Mstislav (from another mother).

    The origin of Mstslav’s mother is unclear. The Russian historian Vernadsky states that Mstislav had the same Scandinavian mother as Yaroslav, other sources claim his mother was Czech.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  45. AP says:
    @melanf

    Sure, but the actual princes of Kiev, the rulers of the state, maintained a pure Scandinavian bloodline up to Vissivald/Vsevolod, who ruled from 1078-1093. Vladimir, for example, had numerous wives, some of whom were not Scandinavians, but his successor after a period of warfare ended up being his son by Ragnhild of Polotsk.
     
    It happened because all brothers of Yaroslav (Vladimir successor ) were killed, or died. The ethnic origin of the mother for the inheritance had absolutely nothing

    It happened because all brothers of Yaroslav (Vladimir successor ) were killed, or died. The ethnic origin of the mother for the inheritance had absolutely nothing

    Absolute coincidence that the rulers of Kiev had a basically pure Scandinavian bloodline for 200 years since Rurik came to those lands.

    The likely explanation is that having two Scandinavian parents probably made it easier for the products of such unions to deal with and gather Norse troops, which played a critical role in struggles for power, at least through the 11th century.

    This state of affairs demonstrates the ridiculousness of thinking of the state at that time as a Slavic (thus, Russian or Ukrainian) one though both Russian and Ukrainian svidomists claim that its rulers were Russians or Ukrainians. Helga (Olga) is the funniest example. Her husband (Ingvar/Igor) was killed and ambushed by Slavs from whom he was collecting tribute (furs, slaves, etc). She avenged her husband’s death by completely slaughtering those Slavs, burning them all alive in their town. So the mass killer of Slavs becomes celebrated as a Slavic Queen. (is this not akin to Fomenko’s ideas about Mongols being really “us”?)

    Read More
    • Replies: @ussr andy

    Olga... mass killer of Slavs
     
    are you sure? Then she can't be my 2D waifu!

    https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/f/f2/Kirillov_knyaginya_olga.jpg/432px-Kirillov_knyaginya_olga.jpg

    I'm reading she slaughtered Drevlians. Could it be that at the time tribal identity was already breaking down and the tribe that wrote history (whichever it was) didn't quite care about Drevlians?

    Russian svidomism at its best.
    The Russian svidomists have mobilized.
    Russian svidomism has met reality
    Other than Russian svidomists
    a lengthy discourse of Russian svidomism

     

    "This isn't a thing. Stop trying to make it a thing"
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  46. @AP
    The Russian svidomists have mobilized.

    In respect of Yaroslav the Wise, this is a ridiculous argument. Yaroslav came to power based on the Novgorod army. One of the episodes of that era – in the year 1015, the inhabitants of Novgorod massacred Scandinavian mercenaries of Yaroslav. Yaroslav in retaliation lured to a feast and massacred the Novgorod aristocracy. However, after that Yaroslav was forced to beg forgiveness from the residents of Novgorod.
     
    So the pure Scandinavian Yaroslav, massacred Slavs who had dared to kill Yaroslav's Scandinavian allies, and later married a Swedish princes, and Yaroslav is a Russian Slav. Priceless.

    Britannica states "Yaroslav, with the active support of the Novgorodians and the help of Varangian (Viking) mercenaries, defeated Svyatopolk and became the grand prince of Kiev in 1019."

    Yaroslav continued to depend on Norse warriors from Scandinavia, such as Jakun:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yakun

    As for Scandinavian/Slav – obviously the princes who give for their children Slavic names, did not consider themselves Scandinavians. Their “biological” origin is irrelevant

     

    Well, one of these Scandinavians with a Slavic name, Vladimir, lived in Norway and gathered an army there with which he seized the Kievan throne. I guess he didn't consider himself a Scandinavian but a Slav, right? Speaking of which -

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Waldemar

    Valdemar I of Denmark or Waldemar the Great (1131–1182)
    Valdemar II of Denmark or Waldemar the Victorious (1170–1241)
    Valdemar the Young (1209–1231)
    Valdemar III of Denmark (1314–1364)
    Waldemar I, Prince of Anhalt-Zerbst (d. 1368)
    Waldemar II, Prince of Anhalt-Zerbst (d. 1371)
    Valdemar IV of Denmark or Waldemar Otherday (c. 1320–1375)
    Waldemar III, Prince of Anhalt-Zerbst (d. 1391)
    Valdemar of Denmark (bishop) (1157/1158–1235 or 1236)
    Prince Valdemar of Denmark (1858–1939)
    Waldemar, Margrave of Brandenburg-Stendal or Waldemar the Great (c. 1280–1319)
    Prince Waldemar of Prussia (1868–1879), son of Emperor Frederick III
    Prince Waldemar of Prussia (1889–1945), son of Prince Henry
    Woldemar, Prince of Lippe (1824–1895)

    And don't forget Valdemar, King of Sweden (1250–1275).

    All of these were Ancient Russians because their name, right? :-)

    As for Scandinavian/Slav – obviously the princes who give for their children Slavic names, did not consider themselves Scandinavians. Their “biological” origin is irrelevant

    Well, one of these Scandinavians with a Slavic name, Vladimir, lived in Norway and gathered an army there with which he seized the Kievan throne. I guess he didn’t consider himself a Scandinavian but a Slav, right? Speaking of which –

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Waldemar

    Valdemar I of Denmark or Waldemar the Great (1131–1182)
    Valdemar II of Denmark or Waldemar the Victorious (1170–1241)…..All of these were Ancient Russians because their name, right?

    Prince Igor (son of Rurik) had a son Svyatoslav (Slavic name)

    Prince Svyatoslav’s sons:
    Yaropolk (Slavic name);
    Oleg (Scandinavian name);
    Vladimir (a Slavic name)

    The throne was inherited by Vladimir, who gave his daughters and sons the following names:

    Vycheslav,
    Svyatopolk,
    Izyaslav,
    Mstislav,
    Jaroslav
    Vsevolod,
    Predslava,
    Premyslova,
    Mstislav,
    Stanislav,
    Sudislav,
    Svyatoslav,
    Boris,
    Gleb,
    Pozvizd,
    Dobronega

    The only Scandinavian name is Gleb. The other names are Slavonic (the name Boris is Turkish, but are borrowed from the Slavs, the Bulgarians). Please give an example of a dynasty of Scandinavian rulers, who in three generations give their children Slavic names. Or give an example of a Scandinavian king, which had 16 children, but only one son with Scandinavian name

    For the rest of your thesis, detailed answer tomorrow evening, no time now

    Read More
    • Replies: @AP

    For the rest of your thesis, detailed answer tomorrow evening, no time now
     
    So we can expect a lengthy discourse of Russian svidomism from the same guy who didn't even know that Vladimir spent time in Norway, where he gathered his Norse troops to seize the throne.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  47. Absolute coincidence that the rulers of Kiev had a basically pure Scandinavian bloodline for 200 years since Rurik came to those lands.

    The mother of Vladimir – slave Malusha. Brother of Malusha – Dobrynya ( Slavic name).
    “Pure Scandinavian bloodline” Lol

    Absolute coincidence that the pure Scandinavian rulers of “Ancient Russia” had a purely Slavic name for 200 years since Svyatoslav (grandson of Rurik).

    Read More
    • Replies: @AP
    Other than Russian svidomists, scholars consider "Malusha" to be the Scandinavian Malfried.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Malusha

    "The anti-Normanist historian Dmitry Ilovaisky managed to draw an opposite conclusion: that the Slavic name Malusha was turned into a Scandinavian Malfried. This claim received no wider support."

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  48. @melanf

    Absolute coincidence that the rulers of Kiev had a basically pure Scandinavian bloodline for 200 years since Rurik came to those lands.
     
    The mother of Vladimir - slave Malusha. Brother of Malusha - Dobrynya ( Slavic name).
    "Pure Scandinavian bloodline" Lol

    Absolute coincidence that the pure Scandinavian rulers of "Ancient Russia" had a purely Slavic name for 200 years since Svyatoslav (grandson of Rurik).

    Other than Russian svidomists, scholars consider “Malusha” to be the Scandinavian Malfried.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Malusha

    “The anti-Normanist historian Dmitry Ilovaisky managed to draw an opposite conclusion: that the Slavic name Malusha was turned into a Scandinavian Malfried. This claim received no wider support.”

    Read More
    • Replies: @melanf

    Do you have a better term for grandiose historical ideas that are believed by people belonging to a certain nation but not widely shared outside that country’s borders? Just because many Russians take their svidomist ideas for granted, and some Russian scholars have even constructed elaborate defenses of their svidomism (ideas, naturally, not widely held outside Russia itself), does not make those ideas true.
     
    Svidomist are obsessed with a certain idea, and that they ignore the facts. Explore a vivid example

    rulers of Kiev had a basically pure Scandinavian bloodline for 200 years since Rurik came ....Other than Russian svidomists, scholars consider “Malusha” (e mother of Prince Vladimir) to be the Scandinavian Malfried.
     
    Slave girl Malusha (not Scandinavian name), sister of Dobrinya (not Scandinavian name), her father Malk of lubech (not Scandinavian name again). But she pure- Scandinavian- bloodline because...because Russian princes in accordance with the АР idea should be pure- Scandinavian- bloodline.

    However there is a version that Malusha - Malfred!

    "On this Malfred (mentioned in the chronicle for the year 1000) was built a lot of guesswork. Some researchers saw it as one of the wives of Vladimir the Saint, while others identified her with the mother of Vladimir - Malusha. From the point of view of the principles of naming, it is more likely that the first Malfred was the mother of Vladimir Svyatoslavich."

    But alas:

    "her name is etymologically was not actually Scandinavian.
    In most of Scandinavia, the first known possessor of this name was Queen Mal(m)Frid, daughter of Mstislav the Great (and wife of Sigurd the Crusader).
    Mention of other Malfrid relate only to the significantly later time, to XIII-XIVвв.
    Most probably at the origin of this name was German and originally had the form of Amalfrida. .... In the case of Mal(m)Frid we are dealing with a very interesting example of indirect penetration of the German name on Scandinavian soil — a name that comes to Scandinavia via Russia. The first owner name Malfred in Russia didn't have to be German. It could happen from any place, where it was strongly influenced by German traditions
    ."

    Litvin, Uspensky "Names of the Russian princes in X-XVI centuries". page 247-249


    There are svidomist who believe that Rurik - Slav. And there are svidomist who believe that Dobrynya - pure-bloodline-Scandinavian. In both cases, the Wrapper is different, but the essence is the same.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  49. @melanf

    As for Scandinavian/Slav – obviously the princes who give for their children Slavic names, did not consider themselves Scandinavians. Their “biological” origin is irrelevant
     

    Well, one of these Scandinavians with a Slavic name, Vladimir, lived in Norway and gathered an army there with which he seized the Kievan throne. I guess he didn’t consider himself a Scandinavian but a Slav, right? Speaking of which –
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Waldemar
    Valdemar I of Denmark or Waldemar the Great (1131–1182)
    Valdemar II of Denmark or Waldemar the Victorious (1170–1241).....All of these were Ancient Russians because their name, right?

     

    Prince Igor (son of Rurik) had a son Svyatoslav (Slavic name)


    Prince Svyatoslav's sons:
    Yaropolk (Slavic name);
    Oleg (Scandinavian name);
    Vladimir (a Slavic name)

    The throne was inherited by Vladimir, who gave his daughters and sons the following names:

    Vycheslav,
    Svyatopolk,
    Izyaslav,
    Mstislav,
    Jaroslav
    Vsevolod,
    Predslava,
    Premyslova,
    Mstislav,
    Stanislav,
    Sudislav,
    Svyatoslav,
    Boris,
    Gleb,
    Pozvizd,
    Dobronega

    The only Scandinavian name is Gleb. The other names are Slavonic (the name Boris is Turkish, but are borrowed from the Slavs, the Bulgarians). Please give an example of a dynasty of Scandinavian rulers, who in three generations give their children Slavic names. Or give an example of a Scandinavian king, which had 16 children, but only one son with Scandinavian name

    For the rest of your thesis, detailed answer tomorrow evening, no time now

    For the rest of your thesis, detailed answer tomorrow evening, no time now

    So we can expect a lengthy discourse of Russian svidomism from the same guy who didn’t even know that Vladimir spent time in Norway, where he gathered his Norse troops to seize the throne.

    Read More
    • Replies: @melanf

    I see that Russian svidomism has met reality and disapproves.
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vladimir_the_Great
     

    So we can expect a lengthy discourse of Russian svidomism from the same guy who didn’t even know that Vladimir spent time in Norway, where he gathered his Norse troops to seize the throne.
     
    Dear friend! Especially for you:

    "Vladimir fled to Scandinavia... But in the Scandinavian sagas no mention of the stay of Vladimir in Sweden or Norway (Скандинавские саги ни словом не упоминают о пребывании Вальдамара Старого в Швеции или Норвегии)... Vladimir overseas was a short time. In 977 or 978 early on, he returned to Novgorod with the Varangian guard ."


    Karpov, A. Y., "St. Vladimir"

    The only source telling us about these events - the Primary chronicle.
    "When Vladimir in Novgorod heard that Yaropolk killed Oleg, then got scared and fled across the sea. And Yaropolk put his Posadnik in Novgorod and owned one Russian land... Vladimir returned to Novgorod with the Varangians and ...began to rule in Novgorod."

    ("Когда Владимир в Новгороде услышал, что Ярополк убил Олега, то испугался и бежал за море. А Ярополк посадил своих посадников в Новгороде и владел один Русскою землею... Владимир вернулся в Новгород с варягами и ...стал править в Новгороде.")

    As you can see about Norway not a single word. Vladimir was almost certainly in Sweden (with which the Ancient Rus was connected most closely, and which was closer).

    Dear AP! For the benefit of your crusade against "Russian svidomism ", use scientific work, not Wikipedia. Wikipedia is a cesspool, where any freak can Express nonsense

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  50. Public service reminder that Rurik himself probably never existed. The dynasty emerges into authentic history only early in the 10th century with Igor. So the period during which it had any serious links with Scandinavia lasted for considerably less than a hundred years, till Vladimir’s return to Kiev in 978 or so.

    Read More
    • Replies: @AP

    Public service reminder that Rurik himself probably never existed.
     
    As a man, who knows. But "his" descendants are genetically linked and the origin is in eastern Sweden:

    http://freepages.genealogy.rootsweb.ancestry.com/~mozhayski/teksty/ydna.html

    "Thanks to this, i.e. Rurikid project, we can now say that Rurik was a historical person who was born on the Roslagen seashore (slightly north of Stockholm, Sweden). However, he was of Finno-Ugrian descent (haplogroup N1c1 (earlier described as N3a)). Although all of well matching N1c1 Rurikid princes are descended from Yaroslav Mudry (978 – 1054), it seems that his ancestors including Rurik (b. ab. 820 – 876) himself, also belonged to this haplogroup. A group of Swedes, whose ancestors lived in or close to Uppsala, and whose genetic haplotypes are very close to these of the Rurikids, seems to be confirming the theory that Rurik, in fact, originated from Sweden."

    So the period during which it had any serious links with Scandinavia lasted for considerably less than a hundred years, till Vladimir’s return to Kiev in 978 or so.
     
    So Vladimir's son Yaroslav seizing the throne with a core of Norse troops, largely depending on Norse troops throughout his reign (see Yakun), and being married to the daughter of Sweden's king, wasn't serious links?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  51. @AP

    It happened because all brothers of Yaroslav (Vladimir successor ) were killed, or died. The ethnic origin of the mother for the inheritance had absolutely nothing
     
    Absolute coincidence that the rulers of Kiev had a basically pure Scandinavian bloodline for 200 years since Rurik came to those lands.

    The likely explanation is that having two Scandinavian parents probably made it easier for the products of such unions to deal with and gather Norse troops, which played a critical role in struggles for power, at least through the 11th century.

    This state of affairs demonstrates the ridiculousness of thinking of the state at that time as a Slavic (thus, Russian or Ukrainian) one though both Russian and Ukrainian svidomists claim that its rulers were Russians or Ukrainians. Helga (Olga) is the funniest example. Her husband (Ingvar/Igor) was killed and ambushed by Slavs from whom he was collecting tribute (furs, slaves, etc). She avenged her husband's death by completely slaughtering those Slavs, burning them all alive in their town. So the mass killer of Slavs becomes celebrated as a Slavic Queen. (is this not akin to Fomenko's ideas about Mongols being really "us"?)

    Olga… mass killer of Slavs

    are you sure? Then she can’t be my 2D waifu!

    I’m reading she slaughtered Drevlians. Could it be that at the time tribal identity was already breaking down and the tribe that wrote history (whichever it was) didn’t quite care about Drevlians?

    Russian svidomism at its best.
    The Russian svidomists have mobilized.
    Russian svidomism has met reality
    Other than Russian svidomists
    a lengthy discourse of Russian svidomism

    “This isn’t a thing. Stop trying to make it a thing”

    Read More
    • Replies: @AP

    Russian svidomism at its best.
    The Russian svidomists have mobilized.
    Russian svidomism has met reality
    Other than Russian svidomists
    a lengthy discourse of Russian svidomism

    “This isn’t a thing. Stop trying to make it a thing”
     
    Do you have a better term for grandiose historical ideas that are believed by people belonging to a certain nation but not widely shared outside that country's borders? Just because many Russians take their svidomist ideas for granted, and some Russian scholars have even constructed elaborate defenses of their svidomism (ideas, naturally, not widely held outside Russia itself), does not make those ideas true.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  52. @AP

    Ancient Russia it was, just as we speak of France, not Gaul, already from the sixth century.
     
    Actually nowadays "Ancient France" is usually and more accurately referred to as the Frankish Kingdom, Frankia, etc. France begins later. Britannica, I suppose, represents modern consensus:

    Emergence of France

    "From the 9th to the 11th century the peoples and lands dominated by western Frankish kings were transformed. The Carolingian protectorate of local order collapsed under the pressures of external invasions and internal usurpations of power. Growing populations and quickening economies were reorganized in principalities whose leaders struggled to carry on the old programs of kings, bishops, and monks; one of these lands, centred on the Paris-Orléans axis and later known as the Île-de-France, was the nucleus of a new dynastic kingdom of France. This kingdom may be spoken of as Capetian France (the first king of the new dynasty having been Hugh Capet), but it was not until the 13th century that this France came to approximate the modern nation in territorial extent. The emergence of a greater France as a social and cultural entity preceded the political expansion of Capetian France; already in the 12th century Crusaders, when speaking of “Franks” from Romance-speaking lands, meant something like “Frenchmen,” while the persistence of old boundaries between populations of Romance and Germanic speech perpetuated the idea of a greater West Frankland."

    French thinking of the Germanic Frankish warrior chieftain Karl as an ancient "Frenchman" is also a form of svidomism.

    If you consult a full genealogy of the Rurikid dynasty, you will see that marriages to Scandinavians early became a small minority of all those contracted.
     
    Sure, but the actual princes of Kiev, the rulers of the state, maintained a pure Scandinavian bloodline up to Vissivald/Vsevolod, who ruled from 1078-1093. Vladimir, for example, had numerous wives, some of whom were not Scandinavians, but his successor after a period of warfare ended up being his son by Ragnhild of Polotsk.

    Rurik came over in around 860. Having rulers who hadn't been mixed with non-Scandinavians for 200 years is an impressive feat.

    Clovis was the first king of France. I have no idea how anyone could consider this statement controversial. And yes, he and Charlemagne spoke German, just as kings of England from William I to Edward III spoke French. The Qianlong emperor was Manchu, but it would be ridiculous to deny that he was also Chinese.

    Read More
    • Replies: @AP

    Clovis was the first king of France. I have no idea how anyone could consider this statement controversial.
     
    I think Britannica probably reflects general consensus. Does it call Clovis king of France?

    https://www.britannica.com/biography/Clovis-I


    Clovis I, (born c. 466—died November 27, 511, Paris, France), king of the Franks and ruler of much of Gaul from 481 to 511, a key period during the transformation of the Roman Empire into Europe. His dynasty, the Merovingians, survived more than 200 years, until the rise of the Carolingians in the 8th century. While he was not the first Frankish king, he was the kingdom’s political and religious founder.

    Clovis was the son of the pagan Frankish king Childeric and the Thuringian queen Basina. He succeeded his father in 481 as the ruler of the Salian Franks and other Frankish groups around Tournai (now in Belgium). Although the chronology of his reign is imprecise, it is certain that by the time of his death in 511 he had consolidated the Franks and expanded his influence and rule to include the Roman province of Belgica Secunda in 486 and the territories of the Alemanni (in 496), the Burgundians (in 500), and the Visigoths (in 507). Clovis’s kingdom began in the region encompassing modern Belgium and northeastern France, expanded south and west, and became the most powerful in Gaul.
     

    It uses France as a geographic term but is careful to describe him as king of the Franks, not of France which did not exist at the time.

    Britannica does note, at the end, that the French consider him to be the first French king. This would seem to be an example of French svidomism - a self-aggrandizing historical idea that is not widely shared outside one's own country.

    The parallels of the relationship between Franks and France, and Rus and Russia, seem to be clear. Except in the case of the Franks only the French claim them to be French, whereas both Ukrainians and Russians claim the Rus. (I suspect though that the French have more Frankish ancestry than Ukrainians and Russians have Scandinavian)

    France seems to begin in the 10th century, with Hugh Capet:

    https://www.britannica.com/biography/Hugh-Capet

    "Hugh Capet, French Hugues Capet (born 938—died October 14, 996, Paris, France), king of France from 987 to 996, and the first of a direct line of 14 Capetian kings of that country. "


    And yes, he and Charlemagne spoke German, just as kings of England from William I to Edward III spoke French. The Qianlong emperor was Manchu, but it would be ridiculous to deny that he was also Chinese.
     
    Your other examples involve conquests of countries that already exited. There was no such thing as France in the time of the Frankish kings.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  53. @5371
    Clovis was the first king of France. I have no idea how anyone could consider this statement controversial. And yes, he and Charlemagne spoke German, just as kings of England from William I to Edward III spoke French. The Qianlong emperor was Manchu, but it would be ridiculous to deny that he was also Chinese.

    Clovis was the first king of France. I have no idea how anyone could consider this statement controversial.

    I think Britannica probably reflects general consensus. Does it call Clovis king of France?

    https://www.britannica.com/biography/Clovis-I

    Clovis I, (born c. 466—died November 27, 511, Paris, France), king of the Franks and ruler of much of Gaul from 481 to 511, a key period during the transformation of the Roman Empire into Europe. His dynasty, the Merovingians, survived more than 200 years, until the rise of the Carolingians in the 8th century. While he was not the first Frankish king, he was the kingdom’s political and religious founder.

    Clovis was the son of the pagan Frankish king Childeric and the Thuringian queen Basina. He succeeded his father in 481 as the ruler of the Salian Franks and other Frankish groups around Tournai (now in Belgium). Although the chronology of his reign is imprecise, it is certain that by the time of his death in 511 he had consolidated the Franks and expanded his influence and rule to include the Roman province of Belgica Secunda in 486 and the territories of the Alemanni (in 496), the Burgundians (in 500), and the Visigoths (in 507). Clovis’s kingdom began in the region encompassing modern Belgium and northeastern France, expanded south and west, and became the most powerful in Gaul.

    It uses France as a geographic term but is careful to describe him as king of the Franks, not of France which did not exist at the time.

    Britannica does note, at the end, that the French consider him to be the first French king. This would seem to be an example of French svidomism – a self-aggrandizing historical idea that is not widely shared outside one’s own country.

    The parallels of the relationship between Franks and France, and Rus and Russia, seem to be clear. Except in the case of the Franks only the French claim them to be French, whereas both Ukrainians and Russians claim the Rus. (I suspect though that the French have more Frankish ancestry than Ukrainians and Russians have Scandinavian)

    France seems to begin in the 10th century, with Hugh Capet:

    https://www.britannica.com/biography/Hugh-Capet

    “Hugh Capet, French Hugues Capet (born 938—died October 14, 996, Paris, France), king of France from 987 to 996, and the first of a direct line of 14 Capetian kings of that country. ”

    And yes, he and Charlemagne spoke German, just as kings of England from William I to Edward III spoke French. The Qianlong emperor was Manchu, but it would be ridiculous to deny that he was also Chinese.

    Your other examples involve conquests of countries that already exited. There was no such thing as France in the time of the Frankish kings.

    Read More
    • Replies: @5371
    If you decide arbitrarily that countries exist only when it is convenient for your argument, of course you will get a result that suits you. Historical continuity is unbroken in France after Clovis as in Russia after Igor. The rest of your comment is just an appeal to authority, and I could cite as authorities historians a lot more distinguished than whoever wrote some article in an online encyclopaedia.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  54. @ussr andy

    Olga... mass killer of Slavs
     
    are you sure? Then she can't be my 2D waifu!

    https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/f/f2/Kirillov_knyaginya_olga.jpg/432px-Kirillov_knyaginya_olga.jpg

    I'm reading she slaughtered Drevlians. Could it be that at the time tribal identity was already breaking down and the tribe that wrote history (whichever it was) didn't quite care about Drevlians?

    Russian svidomism at its best.
    The Russian svidomists have mobilized.
    Russian svidomism has met reality
    Other than Russian svidomists
    a lengthy discourse of Russian svidomism

     

    "This isn't a thing. Stop trying to make it a thing"

    Russian svidomism at its best.
    The Russian svidomists have mobilized.
    Russian svidomism has met reality
    Other than Russian svidomists
    a lengthy discourse of Russian svidomism

    “This isn’t a thing. Stop trying to make it a thing”

    Do you have a better term for grandiose historical ideas that are believed by people belonging to a certain nation but not widely shared outside that country’s borders? Just because many Russians take their svidomist ideas for granted, and some Russian scholars have even constructed elaborate defenses of their svidomism (ideas, naturally, not widely held outside Russia itself), does not make those ideas true.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  55. @5371
    Public service reminder that Rurik himself probably never existed. The dynasty emerges into authentic history only early in the 10th century with Igor. So the period during which it had any serious links with Scandinavia lasted for considerably less than a hundred years, till Vladimir's return to Kiev in 978 or so.

    Public service reminder that Rurik himself probably never existed.

    As a man, who knows. But “his” descendants are genetically linked and the origin is in eastern Sweden:

    http://freepages.genealogy.rootsweb.ancestry.com/~mozhayski/teksty/ydna.html

    “Thanks to this, i.e. Rurikid project, we can now say that Rurik was a historical person who was born on the Roslagen seashore (slightly north of Stockholm, Sweden). However, he was of Finno-Ugrian descent (haplogroup N1c1 (earlier described as N3a)). Although all of well matching N1c1 Rurikid princes are descended from Yaroslav Mudry (978 – 1054), it seems that his ancestors including Rurik (b. ab. 820 – 876) himself, also belonged to this haplogroup. A group of Swedes, whose ancestors lived in or close to Uppsala, and whose genetic haplotypes are very close to these of the Rurikids, seems to be confirming the theory that Rurik, in fact, originated from Sweden.”

    So the period during which it had any serious links with Scandinavia lasted for considerably less than a hundred years, till Vladimir’s return to Kiev in 978 or so.

    So Vladimir’s son Yaroslav seizing the throne with a core of Norse troops, largely depending on Norse troops throughout his reign (see Yakun), and being married to the daughter of Sweden’s king, wasn’t serious links?

    Read More
    • Replies: @5371
    Actually, it would be incorrect to admit that relations were particularly close even before 978. Yaroslav, like his predecessors, used sometimes Scandinavian, sometimes Polish or Polovtsian exiled potentates with their followers as part of his retinue.
    I'm afraid talk of "Finno-Ugrian" haplogroups is pseudoscience.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  56. @AP

    Public service reminder that Rurik himself probably never existed.
     
    As a man, who knows. But "his" descendants are genetically linked and the origin is in eastern Sweden:

    http://freepages.genealogy.rootsweb.ancestry.com/~mozhayski/teksty/ydna.html

    "Thanks to this, i.e. Rurikid project, we can now say that Rurik was a historical person who was born on the Roslagen seashore (slightly north of Stockholm, Sweden). However, he was of Finno-Ugrian descent (haplogroup N1c1 (earlier described as N3a)). Although all of well matching N1c1 Rurikid princes are descended from Yaroslav Mudry (978 – 1054), it seems that his ancestors including Rurik (b. ab. 820 – 876) himself, also belonged to this haplogroup. A group of Swedes, whose ancestors lived in or close to Uppsala, and whose genetic haplotypes are very close to these of the Rurikids, seems to be confirming the theory that Rurik, in fact, originated from Sweden."

    So the period during which it had any serious links with Scandinavia lasted for considerably less than a hundred years, till Vladimir’s return to Kiev in 978 or so.
     
    So Vladimir's son Yaroslav seizing the throne with a core of Norse troops, largely depending on Norse troops throughout his reign (see Yakun), and being married to the daughter of Sweden's king, wasn't serious links?

    Actually, it would be incorrect to admit that relations were particularly close even before 978. Yaroslav, like his predecessors, used sometimes Scandinavian, sometimes Polish or Polovtsian exiled potentates with their followers as part of his retinue.
    I’m afraid talk of “Finno-Ugrian” haplogroups is pseudoscience.

    Read More
    • Agree: melanf
    • Replies: @AP

    Actually, it would be incorrect to admit that relations were particularly close even before 978. Yaroslav, like his predecessors, used sometimes Scandinavian, sometimes Polish or Polovtsian exiled potentates with their followers as part of his retinue.
     
    Sure, but he used Scandinavian troops most of all. In is struggle with Sviatopolk (who was aided by Poles) he was allied with Eimund and his Varangians, and in the struggle against Mstslav his principal ally was Jakun, the bother of Yaroslav's Swedish wife. Yaroslav's Scandinavian connection was much closer than that to other lands.

    I’m afraid talk of “Finno-Ugrian” haplogroups is pseudoscience.
     
    So you don't think that genetic tests showing that various members of Rurikid family branches being related to each other, with an origin in eastern Sweden, aren't science?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  57. @AP

    Clovis was the first king of France. I have no idea how anyone could consider this statement controversial.
     
    I think Britannica probably reflects general consensus. Does it call Clovis king of France?

    https://www.britannica.com/biography/Clovis-I


    Clovis I, (born c. 466—died November 27, 511, Paris, France), king of the Franks and ruler of much of Gaul from 481 to 511, a key period during the transformation of the Roman Empire into Europe. His dynasty, the Merovingians, survived more than 200 years, until the rise of the Carolingians in the 8th century. While he was not the first Frankish king, he was the kingdom’s political and religious founder.

    Clovis was the son of the pagan Frankish king Childeric and the Thuringian queen Basina. He succeeded his father in 481 as the ruler of the Salian Franks and other Frankish groups around Tournai (now in Belgium). Although the chronology of his reign is imprecise, it is certain that by the time of his death in 511 he had consolidated the Franks and expanded his influence and rule to include the Roman province of Belgica Secunda in 486 and the territories of the Alemanni (in 496), the Burgundians (in 500), and the Visigoths (in 507). Clovis’s kingdom began in the region encompassing modern Belgium and northeastern France, expanded south and west, and became the most powerful in Gaul.
     

    It uses France as a geographic term but is careful to describe him as king of the Franks, not of France which did not exist at the time.

    Britannica does note, at the end, that the French consider him to be the first French king. This would seem to be an example of French svidomism - a self-aggrandizing historical idea that is not widely shared outside one's own country.

    The parallels of the relationship between Franks and France, and Rus and Russia, seem to be clear. Except in the case of the Franks only the French claim them to be French, whereas both Ukrainians and Russians claim the Rus. (I suspect though that the French have more Frankish ancestry than Ukrainians and Russians have Scandinavian)

    France seems to begin in the 10th century, with Hugh Capet:

    https://www.britannica.com/biography/Hugh-Capet

    "Hugh Capet, French Hugues Capet (born 938—died October 14, 996, Paris, France), king of France from 987 to 996, and the first of a direct line of 14 Capetian kings of that country. "


    And yes, he and Charlemagne spoke German, just as kings of England from William I to Edward III spoke French. The Qianlong emperor was Manchu, but it would be ridiculous to deny that he was also Chinese.
     
    Your other examples involve conquests of countries that already exited. There was no such thing as France in the time of the Frankish kings.

    If you decide arbitrarily that countries exist only when it is convenient for your argument, of course you will get a result that suits you. Historical continuity is unbroken in France after Clovis as in Russia after Igor. The rest of your comment is just an appeal to authority, and I could cite as authorities historians a lot more distinguished than whoever wrote some article in an online encyclopaedia.

    Read More
    • Replies: @AP

    If you decide arbitrarily that countries exist only when it is convenient for your argument, of course you will get a result that suits you.
     
    I'm going with consensus. Various Encyclopedia don't consider Clovis (or Charlemagne) to be kings of France but kings of the Franks. Britannica I've already quoted, Wikipedia follows Britannica. The Catholic Encyclopedia states of Clovis "Son of Childeric, King of the Salic Franks; born in the year 466; died at Paris, 27 November, 511. He succeeded his father as the King of the Franks of Tournai in 481. " It later states "upon the ruins of the Roman Empire he built up a powerful system, the influence of which dominated European civilization during many centuries, and from which sprang France, Germany, Belgium, Holland, and Switzerland, without taking into account that northern Spain and northern Italy were also, for a time, under the civilizing regime of the Frankish Empire."

    So Frankish Empire does not equal France.

    Historical continuity is unbroken in France after Clovis as in Russia after Igor.
     
    One can interpret the nature of "historical continuity" in whatever way one wants to support a svidomist idea. AK posted some Ukrainian's idea of historical "continuity" in Ukraine from 5,000 years ago, you push the idea that the chieftain of a German tribe who conquered Gaul was a Frenchman and his empire was France. Consensus seems to be that the empire of the German Franks who conquered Gaul was not "France."

    The rest of your comment is just an appeal to authority
     
    No, an appeal to consensus. Encyclopedia probably reflects the consensus. The alternative is to cherry-pick particular bits of data from someone, that happen to support what you claim. Though a quick review of books indicates that almost all sources refer to Clovis as a Frank and not as a Frenchman.

    Britannica quite clearly states that France emerged in the 9th to 11th centuries:

    https://www.britannica.com/place/France/Carolingian-literature-and-arts#toc40313

    From the 9th to the 11th century the peoples and lands dominated by western Frankish kings were transformed. The Carolingian protectorate of local order collapsed under the pressures of external invasions and internal usurpations of power. Growing populations and quickening economies were reorganized in principalities whose leaders struggled to carry on the old programs of kings, bishops, and monks; one of these lands, centred on the Paris-Orléans axis and later known as the Île-de-France, was the nucleus of a new dynastic kingdom of France.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  58. @AP

    For the rest of your thesis, detailed answer tomorrow evening, no time now
     
    So we can expect a lengthy discourse of Russian svidomism from the same guy who didn't even know that Vladimir spent time in Norway, where he gathered his Norse troops to seize the throne.

    I see that Russian svidomism has met reality and disapproves.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vladimir_the_Great

    So we can expect a lengthy discourse of Russian svidomism from the same guy who didn’t even know that Vladimir spent time in Norway, where he gathered his Norse troops to seize the throne.

    Dear friend! Especially for you:

    Vladimir fled to Scandinavia… But in the Scandinavian sagas no mention of the stay of Vladimir in Sweden or Norway (Скандинавские саги ни словом не упоминают о пребывании Вальдамара Старого в Швеции или Норвегии)… Vladimir overseas was a short time. In 977 or 978 early on, he returned to Novgorod with the Varangian guard .”

    Karpov, A. Y., “St. Vladimir”

    The only source telling us about these events – the Primary chronicle.
    When Vladimir in Novgorod heard that Yaropolk killed Oleg, then got scared and fled across the sea. And Yaropolk put his Posadnik in Novgorod and owned one Russian land… Vladimir returned to Novgorod with the Varangians and …began to rule in Novgorod.”

    (“Когда Владимир в Новгороде услышал, что Ярополк убил Олега, то испугался и бежал за море. А Ярополк посадил своих посадников в Новгороде и владел один Русскою землею… Владимир вернулся в Новгород с варягами и …стал править в Новгороде.”)

    As you can see about Norway not a single word. Vladimir was almost certainly in Sweden (with which the Ancient Rus was connected most closely, and which was closer).

    Dear AP! For the benefit of your crusade against “Russian svidomism “, use scientific work, not Wikipedia. Wikipedia is a cesspool, where any freak can Express nonsense

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  59. @AP
    Other than Russian svidomists, scholars consider "Malusha" to be the Scandinavian Malfried.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Malusha

    "The anti-Normanist historian Dmitry Ilovaisky managed to draw an opposite conclusion: that the Slavic name Malusha was turned into a Scandinavian Malfried. This claim received no wider support."

    Do you have a better term for grandiose historical ideas that are believed by people belonging to a certain nation but not widely shared outside that country’s borders? Just because many Russians take their svidomist ideas for granted, and some Russian scholars have even constructed elaborate defenses of their svidomism (ideas, naturally, not widely held outside Russia itself), does not make those ideas true.

    Svidomist are obsessed with a certain idea, and that they ignore the facts. Explore a vivid example

    rulers of Kiev had a basically pure Scandinavian bloodline for 200 years since Rurik came ….Other than Russian svidomists, scholars consider “Malusha” (e mother of Prince Vladimir) to be the Scandinavian Malfried.

    Slave girl Malusha (not Scandinavian name), sister of Dobrinya (not Scandinavian name), her father Malk of lubech (not Scandinavian name again). But she pure- Scandinavian- bloodline because…because Russian princes in accordance with the АР idea should be pure- Scandinavian- bloodline.

    However there is a version that Malusha – Malfred!

    On this Malfred (mentioned in the chronicle for the year 1000) was built a lot of guesswork. Some researchers saw it as one of the wives of Vladimir the Saint, while others identified her with the mother of Vladimir – Malusha. From the point of view of the principles of naming, it is more likely that the first Malfred was the mother of Vladimir Svyatoslavich.”

    But alas:

    her name is etymologically was not actually Scandinavian.
    In most of Scandinavia, the first known possessor of this name was Queen Mal(m)Frid, daughter of Mstislav the Great (and wife of Sigurd the Crusader).
    Mention of other Malfrid relate only to the significantly later time, to XIII-XIVвв.
    Most probably at the origin of this name was German and originally had the form of Amalfrida. …. In the case of Mal(m)Frid we are dealing with a very interesting example of indirect penetration of the German name on Scandinavian soil — a name that comes to Scandinavia via Russia. The first owner name Malfred in Russia didn’t have to be German. It could happen from any place, where it was strongly influenced by German traditions
    .”

    Litvin, Uspensky “Names of the Russian princes in X-XVI centuries”. page 247-249

    There are svidomist who believe that Rurik – Slav. And there are svidomist who believe that Dobrynya – pure-bloodline-Scandinavian. In both cases, the Wrapper is different, but the essence is the same.

    Read More
    • Replies: @AP
    "Slave girl Malusha (not Scandinavian name), sister of Dobrinya (not Scandinavian name), her father Malk of lubech

    Although not much is known about her the consensus seems to be that Malfried was the daughter of a Scandinavian:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Malusha

    As the chronicles are silent on the subject of Malusha's pedigree, 19th-century Russian and Ukrainian historians devised various theories to explain her parentage and name.

    "Alexei Shakhmatov considered Malusha to be the daughter of Mstisha Sveneldovich, son of Sveneld, a Varangian warlord. He believed that the name Malusha was a slavinized version of a Scandinavian name Malfried.[4] In this case, Malusha was of Norse origin.[5] The Primary Chronicle records that a certain Malfried died in 1000. This record follows that of Rogneda's death. Since Rogneda was Vladimir's wife, historians assume that Malfried was another close relative of the ruling prince, preferably his wife or mother.

    The anti-Normanist historian Dmitry Ilovaisky managed to draw an opposite conclusion: that the Slavic name Malusha was turned into a Scandinavian Malfried. This claim received no wider support."

    Litvin, Uspensky “Names of the Russian princes in X-XVI centuries”. page 247-249
     
    I have no doubt that you can find Russian (and Ukrainian) svidomist scholars who insist that Malfried was a Slav. Unfortunately, as in the case of Ukrainian svidomist theories, your ideas and theirs aren't really believed much outside your country.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  60. @melanf

    Do you have a better term for grandiose historical ideas that are believed by people belonging to a certain nation but not widely shared outside that country’s borders? Just because many Russians take their svidomist ideas for granted, and some Russian scholars have even constructed elaborate defenses of their svidomism (ideas, naturally, not widely held outside Russia itself), does not make those ideas true.
     
    Svidomist are obsessed with a certain idea, and that they ignore the facts. Explore a vivid example

    rulers of Kiev had a basically pure Scandinavian bloodline for 200 years since Rurik came ....Other than Russian svidomists, scholars consider “Malusha” (e mother of Prince Vladimir) to be the Scandinavian Malfried.
     
    Slave girl Malusha (not Scandinavian name), sister of Dobrinya (not Scandinavian name), her father Malk of lubech (not Scandinavian name again). But she pure- Scandinavian- bloodline because...because Russian princes in accordance with the АР idea should be pure- Scandinavian- bloodline.

    However there is a version that Malusha - Malfred!

    "On this Malfred (mentioned in the chronicle for the year 1000) was built a lot of guesswork. Some researchers saw it as one of the wives of Vladimir the Saint, while others identified her with the mother of Vladimir - Malusha. From the point of view of the principles of naming, it is more likely that the first Malfred was the mother of Vladimir Svyatoslavich."

    But alas:

    "her name is etymologically was not actually Scandinavian.
    In most of Scandinavia, the first known possessor of this name was Queen Mal(m)Frid, daughter of Mstislav the Great (and wife of Sigurd the Crusader).
    Mention of other Malfrid relate only to the significantly later time, to XIII-XIVвв.
    Most probably at the origin of this name was German and originally had the form of Amalfrida. .... In the case of Mal(m)Frid we are dealing with a very interesting example of indirect penetration of the German name on Scandinavian soil — a name that comes to Scandinavia via Russia. The first owner name Malfred in Russia didn't have to be German. It could happen from any place, where it was strongly influenced by German traditions
    ."

    Litvin, Uspensky "Names of the Russian princes in X-XVI centuries". page 247-249


    There are svidomist who believe that Rurik - Slav. And there are svidomist who believe that Dobrynya - pure-bloodline-Scandinavian. In both cases, the Wrapper is different, but the essence is the same.

    “Slave girl Malusha (not Scandinavian name), sister of Dobrinya (not Scandinavian name), her father Malk of lubech

    Although not much is known about her the consensus seems to be that Malfried was the daughter of a Scandinavian:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Malusha

    As the chronicles are silent on the subject of Malusha’s pedigree, 19th-century Russian and Ukrainian historians devised various theories to explain her parentage and name.

    “Alexei Shakhmatov considered Malusha to be the daughter of Mstisha Sveneldovich, son of Sveneld, a Varangian warlord. He believed that the name Malusha was a slavinized version of a Scandinavian name Malfried.[4] In this case, Malusha was of Norse origin.[5] The Primary Chronicle records that a certain Malfried died in 1000. This record follows that of Rogneda’s death. Since Rogneda was Vladimir’s wife, historians assume that Malfried was another close relative of the ruling prince, preferably his wife or mother.

    The anti-Normanist historian Dmitry Ilovaisky managed to draw an opposite conclusion: that the Slavic name Malusha was turned into a Scandinavian Malfried. This claim received no wider support.”

    Litvin, Uspensky “Names of the Russian princes in X-XVI centuries”. page 247-249

    I have no doubt that you can find Russian (and Ukrainian) svidomist scholars who insist that Malfried was a Slav. Unfortunately, as in the case of Ukrainian svidomist theories, your ideas and theirs aren’t really believed much outside your country.

    Read More
    • Replies: @melanf

    Slave girl Malusha (not Scandinavian name), sister of Dobrinya (not Scandinavian name), her father Malk of lubech (not Scandinavian name)"

    Although not much is known about her the consensus seems to be that Malfried was the daughter of a Scandinavian:
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Malusha
     

    Explain please, how a slave whose name was not Scandinavian, brother which is called non-Scandinavian name, and whose father has not a Scandinavian name , can be considered the daughter of a Scandinavian?

    Only no need to embarrass this discussion by referencing Wikipedia. Wikipedia is garbage.

    Shakhmatov version does not have the popularity among historians . Using your method ( find the "right" version, no matter how marginal, and accept it as a proven fact) it's easy to find other explanations

    "The most famous East Slavic pre-Christian name is the name of the drevlyan Prince Mal..... The female variant of male name of Mal
    is the name Malusha known as the name of the housekeeper Princess Olga: "Vladimir was the son of the housekeeper Malusha". And as the father of Malusha was Malk, Malusha derived from the name of the father.... Name qualification Malk of Lyubech can attest to the fact that the father was from a Slavic tribe lubeca, or from Liubech or Lübeck.

    http://cyberleninka.ru/article/n/lichnye-imena-povesti-vremennyh-let-kak-otrazhenie-kartiny-mira-srednevekovogo-cheloveka#ixzz4cmoNhaOn"


    I have no doubt that you can find Russian (and Ukrainian) svidomist scholars who insist that Malfried was a Slav. Unfortunately, as in the case of Ukrainian svidomist theories, your ideas and theirs aren’t really believed much outside your country.
     
    So show us the article of Western scholars (not Wikipedia!!!), where it is alleged that Vladimir and Yaroslav were purely Scandinavian rulers with pure Scandinavian bloodline, and Malusha Dobrynya was the Scandinavians and so on. For some reason (the machinations of Russian svidomists?) Western scientists only talk about the Scandinavian origin of the Russian princes after Igor.


    Also explain why "Scandinavian rulers" many generations had Slavic names, Slavic titles (князь, боярин), worshiped Slavic gods? Western scientists explain this fact by the assimilation of the Rurik descendants . But you have another explanation?

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  61. @5371
    Actually, it would be incorrect to admit that relations were particularly close even before 978. Yaroslav, like his predecessors, used sometimes Scandinavian, sometimes Polish or Polovtsian exiled potentates with their followers as part of his retinue.
    I'm afraid talk of "Finno-Ugrian" haplogroups is pseudoscience.

    Actually, it would be incorrect to admit that relations were particularly close even before 978. Yaroslav, like his predecessors, used sometimes Scandinavian, sometimes Polish or Polovtsian exiled potentates with their followers as part of his retinue.

    Sure, but he used Scandinavian troops most of all. In is struggle with Sviatopolk (who was aided by Poles) he was allied with Eimund and his Varangians, and in the struggle against Mstslav his principal ally was Jakun, the bother of Yaroslav’s Swedish wife. Yaroslav’s Scandinavian connection was much closer than that to other lands.

    I’m afraid talk of “Finno-Ugrian” haplogroups is pseudoscience.

    So you don’t think that genetic tests showing that various members of Rurikid family branches being related to each other, with an origin in eastern Sweden, aren’t science?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  62. @5371
    If you decide arbitrarily that countries exist only when it is convenient for your argument, of course you will get a result that suits you. Historical continuity is unbroken in France after Clovis as in Russia after Igor. The rest of your comment is just an appeal to authority, and I could cite as authorities historians a lot more distinguished than whoever wrote some article in an online encyclopaedia.

    If you decide arbitrarily that countries exist only when it is convenient for your argument, of course you will get a result that suits you.

    I’m going with consensus. Various Encyclopedia don’t consider Clovis (or Charlemagne) to be kings of France but kings of the Franks. Britannica I’ve already quoted, Wikipedia follows Britannica. The Catholic Encyclopedia states of Clovis “Son of Childeric, King of the Salic Franks; born in the year 466; died at Paris, 27 November, 511. He succeeded his father as the King of the Franks of Tournai in 481. ” It later states “upon the ruins of the Roman Empire he built up a powerful system, the influence of which dominated European civilization during many centuries, and from which sprang France, Germany, Belgium, Holland, and Switzerland, without taking into account that northern Spain and northern Italy were also, for a time, under the civilizing regime of the Frankish Empire.”

    So Frankish Empire does not equal France.

    Historical continuity is unbroken in France after Clovis as in Russia after Igor.

    One can interpret the nature of “historical continuity” in whatever way one wants to support a svidomist idea. AK posted some Ukrainian’s idea of historical “continuity” in Ukraine from 5,000 years ago, you push the idea that the chieftain of a German tribe who conquered Gaul was a Frenchman and his empire was France. Consensus seems to be that the empire of the German Franks who conquered Gaul was not “France.”

    The rest of your comment is just an appeal to authority

    No, an appeal to consensus. Encyclopedia probably reflects the consensus. The alternative is to cherry-pick particular bits of data from someone, that happen to support what you claim. Though a quick review of books indicates that almost all sources refer to Clovis as a Frank and not as a Frenchman.

    Britannica quite clearly states that France emerged in the 9th to 11th centuries:

    https://www.britannica.com/place/France/Carolingian-literature-and-arts#toc40313

    From the 9th to the 11th century the peoples and lands dominated by western Frankish kings were transformed. The Carolingian protectorate of local order collapsed under the pressures of external invasions and internal usurpations of power. Growing populations and quickening economies were reorganized in principalities whose leaders struggled to carry on the old programs of kings, bishops, and monks; one of these lands, centred on the Paris-Orléans axis and later known as the Île-de-France, was the nucleus of a new dynastic kingdom of France.

    Read More
    • Replies: @5371
    Clovis was a Frank like his ancestors: he also founded the French monarchy which his descendants inherited. Hope that clears it up.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  63. @AP

    If you decide arbitrarily that countries exist only when it is convenient for your argument, of course you will get a result that suits you.
     
    I'm going with consensus. Various Encyclopedia don't consider Clovis (or Charlemagne) to be kings of France but kings of the Franks. Britannica I've already quoted, Wikipedia follows Britannica. The Catholic Encyclopedia states of Clovis "Son of Childeric, King of the Salic Franks; born in the year 466; died at Paris, 27 November, 511. He succeeded his father as the King of the Franks of Tournai in 481. " It later states "upon the ruins of the Roman Empire he built up a powerful system, the influence of which dominated European civilization during many centuries, and from which sprang France, Germany, Belgium, Holland, and Switzerland, without taking into account that northern Spain and northern Italy were also, for a time, under the civilizing regime of the Frankish Empire."

    So Frankish Empire does not equal France.

    Historical continuity is unbroken in France after Clovis as in Russia after Igor.
     
    One can interpret the nature of "historical continuity" in whatever way one wants to support a svidomist idea. AK posted some Ukrainian's idea of historical "continuity" in Ukraine from 5,000 years ago, you push the idea that the chieftain of a German tribe who conquered Gaul was a Frenchman and his empire was France. Consensus seems to be that the empire of the German Franks who conquered Gaul was not "France."

    The rest of your comment is just an appeal to authority
     
    No, an appeal to consensus. Encyclopedia probably reflects the consensus. The alternative is to cherry-pick particular bits of data from someone, that happen to support what you claim. Though a quick review of books indicates that almost all sources refer to Clovis as a Frank and not as a Frenchman.

    Britannica quite clearly states that France emerged in the 9th to 11th centuries:

    https://www.britannica.com/place/France/Carolingian-literature-and-arts#toc40313

    From the 9th to the 11th century the peoples and lands dominated by western Frankish kings were transformed. The Carolingian protectorate of local order collapsed under the pressures of external invasions and internal usurpations of power. Growing populations and quickening economies were reorganized in principalities whose leaders struggled to carry on the old programs of kings, bishops, and monks; one of these lands, centred on the Paris-Orléans axis and later known as the Île-de-France, was the nucleus of a new dynastic kingdom of France.

    Clovis was a Frank like his ancestors: he also founded the French monarchy which his descendants inherited. Hope that clears it up.

    Read More
    • Replies: @AP

    Clovis was a Frank like his ancestors: he also founded the French monarchy which his descendants inherited. Hope that clears it up.
     
    Well, subsequent "French" monarchs aren't referred to as French either.

    https://www.britannica.com/biography/Pippin-III

    Pippin III
    KING OF THE FRANKS

    Pippin III, also spelled Pepin, byname Pippin the Short, French Pépin le Bref, German Pippin der Kurze (born c. 714—died September 24, 768, Saint-Denis, Neustria [now in France]), the first king of the Frankish Carolingian dynasty and the father of Charlemagne. A son of Charles Martel, Pippin became sole de facto ruler of the Franks in 747 and then, on the deposition of Childeric III in 751, king of the Franks. He was the first Frankish king to be anointed—first by St. Boniface and later (754) by Pope Stephen II.

    https://www.britannica.com/biography/Charlemagne

    Charlemagne, also called Charles I, by name Charles the Great (born April 2, 747?—died January 28, 814, Aachen, Austrasia [now in Germany]), king of the Franks (768–814), king of the Lombards (774–814), and first emperor (800–814) of the Romans and of what was later called the Holy Roman Empire.

    "French" and "France" don't even appear in the articles, other than to describe their names in French.

    This treatment appears to be standard, at least based on a review of various books accessible on-line, like this one.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  64. @AP
    "Slave girl Malusha (not Scandinavian name), sister of Dobrinya (not Scandinavian name), her father Malk of lubech

    Although not much is known about her the consensus seems to be that Malfried was the daughter of a Scandinavian:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Malusha

    As the chronicles are silent on the subject of Malusha's pedigree, 19th-century Russian and Ukrainian historians devised various theories to explain her parentage and name.

    "Alexei Shakhmatov considered Malusha to be the daughter of Mstisha Sveneldovich, son of Sveneld, a Varangian warlord. He believed that the name Malusha was a slavinized version of a Scandinavian name Malfried.[4] In this case, Malusha was of Norse origin.[5] The Primary Chronicle records that a certain Malfried died in 1000. This record follows that of Rogneda's death. Since Rogneda was Vladimir's wife, historians assume that Malfried was another close relative of the ruling prince, preferably his wife or mother.

    The anti-Normanist historian Dmitry Ilovaisky managed to draw an opposite conclusion: that the Slavic name Malusha was turned into a Scandinavian Malfried. This claim received no wider support."

    Litvin, Uspensky “Names of the Russian princes in X-XVI centuries”. page 247-249
     
    I have no doubt that you can find Russian (and Ukrainian) svidomist scholars who insist that Malfried was a Slav. Unfortunately, as in the case of Ukrainian svidomist theories, your ideas and theirs aren't really believed much outside your country.

    Slave girl Malusha (not Scandinavian name), sister of Dobrinya (not Scandinavian name), her father Malk of lubech (not Scandinavian name)

    Although not much is known about her the consensus seems to be that Malfried was the daughter of a Scandinavian:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Malusha

    Explain please, how a slave whose name was not Scandinavian, brother which is called non-Scandinavian name, and whose father has not a Scandinavian name , can be considered the daughter of a Scandinavian?

    Only no need to embarrass this discussion by referencing Wikipedia. Wikipedia is garbage.

    Shakhmatov version does not have the popularity among historians . Using your method ( find the “right” version, no matter how marginal, and accept it as a proven fact) it’s easy to find other explanations

    The most famous East Slavic pre-Christian name is the name of the drevlyan Prince Mal….. The female variant of male name of Mal
    is the name Malusha known as the name of the housekeeper Princess Olga: “Vladimir was the son of the housekeeper Malusha”. And as the father of Malusha was Malk, Malusha derived from the name of the father…. Name qualification Malk of Lyubech can attest to the fact that the father was from a Slavic tribe lubeca, or from Liubech or Lübeck.

    http://cyberleninka.ru/article/n/lichnye-imena-povesti-vremennyh-let-kak-otrazhenie-kartiny-mira-srednevekovogo-cheloveka#ixzz4cmoNhaOn”

    I have no doubt that you can find Russian (and Ukrainian) svidomist scholars who insist that Malfried was a Slav. Unfortunately, as in the case of Ukrainian svidomist theories, your ideas and theirs aren’t really believed much outside your country.

    So show us the article of Western scholars (not Wikipedia!!!), where it is alleged that Vladimir and Yaroslav were purely Scandinavian rulers with pure Scandinavian bloodline, and Malusha Dobrynya was the Scandinavians and so on. For some reason (the machinations of Russian svidomists?) Western scientists only talk about the Scandinavian origin of the Russian princes after Igor.

    Also explain why “Scandinavian rulers” many generations had Slavic names, Slavic titles (князь, боярин), worshiped Slavic gods? Western scientists explain this fact by the assimilation of the Rurik descendants . But you have another explanation?

    Read More
    • Replies: @AP

    Explain please, how a slave whose name was not Scandinavian, brother which is called non-Scandinavian name, and whose father has not a Scandinavian name , can be considered the daughter of a Scandinavian?
     
    The problem is that the more accepted theory is that the Scandinavian name came first and the Slavs made up a Slavic version.

    As for the names of the rulers:

    1. The numerous Waldemars across Scandinavia itself tell us that Scandinavians liked Slavic names.

    2. You do realize that these people also used Scandinavian names when interacting with their own people. Yarosalv was Jarisleif, for example. In a modern version of this, there are not a small numbers of "Jennifers" in the USA born to Russian parents who are also called "Zhenya."

    Only no need to embarrass this discussion by referencing Wikipedia. Wikipedia is garbage.
     
    If you find another non-Russian source, provide it please.

    http://cyberleninka.ru/article/n/lichnye-imena-povesti-vremennyh-let-kak-otrazhenie-kartiny-mira-srednevekovogo-cheloveka#ixzz4cmoNhaOn”
     
    The problem with using Russian sources on this matter is that they are open to svidomism. One could, for example, use a hundreds-pages book by Hrushevsky, full of footnotes and evidence, to show that the Rus were Slavs (and Ukrainians). So what?

    But it's telling that even Russian sources have mixed views on the topic - some claim that she was a Scandinavian.

    In the absence of other non-Russian sources, I'll have to use wikipedia.

    Western scientists only talk about the Scandinavian origin of the Russian princes after Igor.
     
    Western sources note that Vladimir moved to Scandinavia (exact location, Sweden or Norway, not specified but his troops seemed to have been from Norway) and used Norse troops to seize the throne. Yaroslav was the son of Vladimir and a woman (Ragnhild) whose origins were undisputably Scandinavian. His core forces consisted of Scandinavians in his various conflicts. When Slavs in Novogord killed his Norse allies because they had been abusing Slavs, Yaroslav slaughtered the Slavic nobles. He married a Swedish princess and his Swedish brother-in-law was his main ally in the war against his brother Mstislav. If you think that Yaroslav was a Slav, the Svidomism is strong in you, indeed.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  65. @5371
    Clovis was a Frank like his ancestors: he also founded the French monarchy which his descendants inherited. Hope that clears it up.

    Clovis was a Frank like his ancestors: he also founded the French monarchy which his descendants inherited. Hope that clears it up.

    Well, subsequent “French” monarchs aren’t referred to as French either.

    https://www.britannica.com/biography/Pippin-III

    Pippin III
    KING OF THE FRANKS

    Pippin III, also spelled Pepin, byname Pippin the Short, French Pépin le Bref, German Pippin der Kurze (born c. 714—died September 24, 768, Saint-Denis, Neustria [now in France]), the first king of the Frankish Carolingian dynasty and the father of Charlemagne. A son of Charles Martel, Pippin became sole de facto ruler of the Franks in 747 and then, on the deposition of Childeric III in 751, king of the Franks. He was the first Frankish king to be anointed—first by St. Boniface and later (754) by Pope Stephen II.

    https://www.britannica.com/biography/Charlemagne

    Charlemagne, also called Charles I, by name Charles the Great (born April 2, 747?—died January 28, 814, Aachen, Austrasia [now in Germany]), king of the Franks (768–814), king of the Lombards (774–814), and first emperor (800–814) of the Romans and of what was later called the Holy Roman Empire.

    “French” and “France” don’t even appear in the articles, other than to describe their names in French.

    This treatment appears to be standard, at least based on a review of various books accessible on-line, like this one.

    Read More
    • Replies: @5371
    When Louis-Philippe called himself "King of the French" rather than "King of France" as his predecessors had, it did not mean that the French state had been replaced. In the same way, though from the end of the twelfth century French monarchs used the title of "King of France" alongside the original "King of the Franks", that does not mean the monarchy itself started or changed with Philippe Auguste.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  66. @melanf

    Slave girl Malusha (not Scandinavian name), sister of Dobrinya (not Scandinavian name), her father Malk of lubech (not Scandinavian name)"

    Although not much is known about her the consensus seems to be that Malfried was the daughter of a Scandinavian:
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Malusha
     

    Explain please, how a slave whose name was not Scandinavian, brother which is called non-Scandinavian name, and whose father has not a Scandinavian name , can be considered the daughter of a Scandinavian?

    Only no need to embarrass this discussion by referencing Wikipedia. Wikipedia is garbage.

    Shakhmatov version does not have the popularity among historians . Using your method ( find the "right" version, no matter how marginal, and accept it as a proven fact) it's easy to find other explanations

    "The most famous East Slavic pre-Christian name is the name of the drevlyan Prince Mal..... The female variant of male name of Mal
    is the name Malusha known as the name of the housekeeper Princess Olga: "Vladimir was the son of the housekeeper Malusha". And as the father of Malusha was Malk, Malusha derived from the name of the father.... Name qualification Malk of Lyubech can attest to the fact that the father was from a Slavic tribe lubeca, or from Liubech or Lübeck.

    http://cyberleninka.ru/article/n/lichnye-imena-povesti-vremennyh-let-kak-otrazhenie-kartiny-mira-srednevekovogo-cheloveka#ixzz4cmoNhaOn"


    I have no doubt that you can find Russian (and Ukrainian) svidomist scholars who insist that Malfried was a Slav. Unfortunately, as in the case of Ukrainian svidomist theories, your ideas and theirs aren’t really believed much outside your country.
     
    So show us the article of Western scholars (not Wikipedia!!!), where it is alleged that Vladimir and Yaroslav were purely Scandinavian rulers with pure Scandinavian bloodline, and Malusha Dobrynya was the Scandinavians and so on. For some reason (the machinations of Russian svidomists?) Western scientists only talk about the Scandinavian origin of the Russian princes after Igor.


    Also explain why "Scandinavian rulers" many generations had Slavic names, Slavic titles (князь, боярин), worshiped Slavic gods? Western scientists explain this fact by the assimilation of the Rurik descendants . But you have another explanation?

    Explain please, how a slave whose name was not Scandinavian, brother which is called non-Scandinavian name, and whose father has not a Scandinavian name , can be considered the daughter of a Scandinavian?

    The problem is that the more accepted theory is that the Scandinavian name came first and the Slavs made up a Slavic version.

    As for the names of the rulers:

    1. The numerous Waldemars across Scandinavia itself tell us that Scandinavians liked Slavic names.

    2. You do realize that these people also used Scandinavian names when interacting with their own people. Yarosalv was Jarisleif, for example. In a modern version of this, there are not a small numbers of “Jennifers” in the USA born to Russian parents who are also called “Zhenya.”

    Only no need to embarrass this discussion by referencing Wikipedia. Wikipedia is garbage.

    If you find another non-Russian source, provide it please.

    http://cyberleninka.ru/article/n/lichnye-imena-povesti-vremennyh-let-kak-otrazhenie-kartiny-mira-srednevekovogo-cheloveka#ixzz4cmoNhaOn”

    The problem with using Russian sources on this matter is that they are open to svidomism. One could, for example, use a hundreds-pages book by Hrushevsky, full of footnotes and evidence, to show that the Rus were Slavs (and Ukrainians). So what?

    But it’s telling that even Russian sources have mixed views on the topic – some claim that she was a Scandinavian.

    In the absence of other non-Russian sources, I’ll have to use wikipedia.

    Western scientists only talk about the Scandinavian origin of the Russian princes after Igor.

    Western sources note that Vladimir moved to Scandinavia (exact location, Sweden or Norway, not specified but his troops seemed to have been from Norway) and used Norse troops to seize the throne. Yaroslav was the son of Vladimir and a woman (Ragnhild) whose origins were undisputably Scandinavian. His core forces consisted of Scandinavians in his various conflicts. When Slavs in Novogord killed his Norse allies because they had been abusing Slavs, Yaroslav slaughtered the Slavic nobles. He married a Swedish princess and his Swedish brother-in-law was his main ally in the war against his brother Mstislav. If you think that Yaroslav was a Slav, the Svidomism is strong in you, indeed.

    Read More
    • Replies: @5371
    Yaroslav lost the battle against Mstislav, and the brothers came to a peace agreement; then, as already for many years, the prince of Kiev was merely primus inter pares, which makes the obsession with his precise ancestry and allies as decisive for the whole of Russia absurd.
    , @melanf

    The problem is that the more accepted theory is that the Scandinavian name came first and the Slavs made up a Slavic version.
     
    That is, the names Jaroslav, Yaropolk, Svyatoslav, etc. are derived from Scandinavian languages? Cool hypothesis. Please give examples of the use of these names by Scandinavians.
    , @melanf

    The problem is that the more accepted theory is that the Scandinavian name came first and the Slavs made up a Slavic version.
     
    That is, the names Jaroslav, Yaropolk, Svyatoslav, etc. are derived from Scandinavian languages? Cool hypothesis. Please give examples of the use of these names by Scandinavians.

    As for the names of the rulers:
    1. The numerous Waldemars across Scandinavia itself tell us that Scandinavians liked Slavic names.
     
    The numerous Olegs, Rjuriks and Glebs among Russian Princes itself tell us that Slavic liked Scandinavians names. For example Rurik Rostislavich Grand Prince of Kiev in XIII century, Oleg Ivanovich Prince of Ryazan XIV century. In such a case, based on your logic, we should assume that all holders of Scandinavian names are Slavs?

    You do realize that these people also used Scandinavian names when interacting with their own people. Yarosalv was Jarisleif, for example.
     
    Jarisleif is not Scandinavian name it is a Slavic name, which was written by Scandinavians. Similarly in Russian chronicles the Scandinavian name Helge turned to Oleg, Hakon in the Jakun, etc.

    In the absence of other non-Russian sources, I’ll have to use wikipedia.
     
    In Russian, such “methods” of analysis famous as folk-history.

    Western sources note that Vladimir moved to Scandinavia (exact location, Sweden or Norway, not specified but his troops seemed to have been from Norway) and used Norse troops to seize the throne.
    Yaroslav was the son of Vladimir and a woman (Ragnhild) whose origins were undisputably Scandinavian. His core forces consisted of Scandinavians in his various conflicts.
     
    4 Norwegian King (Olav Trjuggvason, Saint Olav, Magnus Olavsson, Harald Sigurdarson) were in exile in Russia, and regained the throne with the support of Russian Princes. These Norwegian Kings by your logic the Slavs?

    The greatest Scandinavian King Cnut the Great was the son of the Danish King, and daughter of a Slavic prince. Against enemies (mostly other Scandinavians) he used Slavic warriors. Cnut the Great by your logic - Slavs?


    When Slavs in Novogord killed his Norse allies because they had been abusing Slavs, Yaroslav slaughtered the Slavic nobles.
     
    And then he begged citizens of Novgorod for forgiveness.

    If you think that Yaroslav was a Slav, the Svidomism is strong in you, indeed.
     
    Yaroslav's sons names:
    Vladimir
    Izyaslav
    Svyatoslav
    Vsevolod
    Vyacheslav
    Igor

    Yaroslav undoubtedly was a Slav (though Scandinavian origin). He, among others, public affairs, amounted to a compendium of laws. Guess what language?

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  67. @AP

    Explain please, how a slave whose name was not Scandinavian, brother which is called non-Scandinavian name, and whose father has not a Scandinavian name , can be considered the daughter of a Scandinavian?
     
    The problem is that the more accepted theory is that the Scandinavian name came first and the Slavs made up a Slavic version.

    As for the names of the rulers:

    1. The numerous Waldemars across Scandinavia itself tell us that Scandinavians liked Slavic names.

    2. You do realize that these people also used Scandinavian names when interacting with their own people. Yarosalv was Jarisleif, for example. In a modern version of this, there are not a small numbers of "Jennifers" in the USA born to Russian parents who are also called "Zhenya."

    Only no need to embarrass this discussion by referencing Wikipedia. Wikipedia is garbage.
     
    If you find another non-Russian source, provide it please.

    http://cyberleninka.ru/article/n/lichnye-imena-povesti-vremennyh-let-kak-otrazhenie-kartiny-mira-srednevekovogo-cheloveka#ixzz4cmoNhaOn”
     
    The problem with using Russian sources on this matter is that they are open to svidomism. One could, for example, use a hundreds-pages book by Hrushevsky, full of footnotes and evidence, to show that the Rus were Slavs (and Ukrainians). So what?

    But it's telling that even Russian sources have mixed views on the topic - some claim that she was a Scandinavian.

    In the absence of other non-Russian sources, I'll have to use wikipedia.

    Western scientists only talk about the Scandinavian origin of the Russian princes after Igor.
     
    Western sources note that Vladimir moved to Scandinavia (exact location, Sweden or Norway, not specified but his troops seemed to have been from Norway) and used Norse troops to seize the throne. Yaroslav was the son of Vladimir and a woman (Ragnhild) whose origins were undisputably Scandinavian. His core forces consisted of Scandinavians in his various conflicts. When Slavs in Novogord killed his Norse allies because they had been abusing Slavs, Yaroslav slaughtered the Slavic nobles. He married a Swedish princess and his Swedish brother-in-law was his main ally in the war against his brother Mstislav. If you think that Yaroslav was a Slav, the Svidomism is strong in you, indeed.

    Yaroslav lost the battle against Mstislav, and the brothers came to a peace agreement; then, as already for many years, the prince of Kiev was merely primus inter pares, which makes the obsession with his precise ancestry and allies as decisive for the whole of Russia absurd.

    Read More
    • LOL: inertial
    • Replies: @AP

    Yaroslav lost the battle against Mstislav, and the brothers came to a peace agreement; then, as already for many years, the prince of Kiev was merely primus inter pares,
     
    Mstslav died in 1036, 12 years after he defeated Yaroslav and Yaroslav's Swedish ally.

    which makes the obsession with his precise ancestry and allies as decisive for the whole of Russia absurd
     
    And yet you chose to minimize Yaroslav's Scandinavian connection by stating "Yaroslav, like his predecessors, used sometimes Scandinavian, sometimes Polish or Polovtsian exiled potentates with their followers as part of his retinue" when in reality Yaroslav was much more dependent on Scandinavian troops and alliance than he was on any of the other ones.
    , @inertial
    Accidental lol.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  68. @AP

    Clovis was a Frank like his ancestors: he also founded the French monarchy which his descendants inherited. Hope that clears it up.
     
    Well, subsequent "French" monarchs aren't referred to as French either.

    https://www.britannica.com/biography/Pippin-III

    Pippin III
    KING OF THE FRANKS

    Pippin III, also spelled Pepin, byname Pippin the Short, French Pépin le Bref, German Pippin der Kurze (born c. 714—died September 24, 768, Saint-Denis, Neustria [now in France]), the first king of the Frankish Carolingian dynasty and the father of Charlemagne. A son of Charles Martel, Pippin became sole de facto ruler of the Franks in 747 and then, on the deposition of Childeric III in 751, king of the Franks. He was the first Frankish king to be anointed—first by St. Boniface and later (754) by Pope Stephen II.

    https://www.britannica.com/biography/Charlemagne

    Charlemagne, also called Charles I, by name Charles the Great (born April 2, 747?—died January 28, 814, Aachen, Austrasia [now in Germany]), king of the Franks (768–814), king of the Lombards (774–814), and first emperor (800–814) of the Romans and of what was later called the Holy Roman Empire.

    "French" and "France" don't even appear in the articles, other than to describe their names in French.

    This treatment appears to be standard, at least based on a review of various books accessible on-line, like this one.

    When Louis-Philippe called himself “King of the French” rather than “King of France” as his predecessors had, it did not mean that the French state had been replaced. In the same way, though from the end of the twelfth century French monarchs used the title of “King of France” alongside the original “King of the Franks”, that does not mean the monarchy itself started or changed with Philippe Auguste.

    Read More
    • Replies: @AP
    We can each propose various ideas about when France came to exist; these don't count for much.

    Whatever your personal arguments, the consensus of modern scholars, seen in numerous sources I've already linked to during our discussion (Britannica, various books published by university presses), is that the Kingdom of the Franks, or Frankia, was not France, and its rulers were not Frenchmen but Franks. Indeed, the sources explicitly write that France later arose later from these Frankish states. Clovis, Pepin, Charles Martel, Charlemagne are almost everywhere described as Frankish not as French kings. The sources start describing "France" alongside the rise of the Capetians starting in the 10th century.

    Yet another example, "France in the Making", Oxford University Press

    "Covering the centuries between the disintegration of the Carolingian empire and the rise of the French monarchy, this book traces the long period of gestation that ended with the emergence of the kingdom of France as a recognizable political entity capable of inspiring the loyalty of its peoples. The author describes the emergence in the late ninth and tenth centuries of principalities and lesser political units in which the personal qualities or resources of the rulers permitted them to command obedience. In the eleventh century, the threat of political fragmentation led princes to establish sounder theoretical foundations for their authority in legal and administrative procedures. The twelfth-century kings of France, hitherto little more than princes of the Ile-de-France, exploited the state-building activities of their princes to re-establish their own lordship over all the princes, counts, and bishops within their realm. At the same time, they contrived to identify themselves in their subjects' imaginations with the dawning sense of French community. By 1180 the kingdom of France was firmly established, both on the map of Europe and in the minds of its inhabitants."

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  69. AP says:
    @5371
    Yaroslav lost the battle against Mstislav, and the brothers came to a peace agreement; then, as already for many years, the prince of Kiev was merely primus inter pares, which makes the obsession with his precise ancestry and allies as decisive for the whole of Russia absurd.

    Yaroslav lost the battle against Mstislav, and the brothers came to a peace agreement; then, as already for many years, the prince of Kiev was merely primus inter pares,

    Mstslav died in 1036, 12 years after he defeated Yaroslav and Yaroslav’s Swedish ally.

    which makes the obsession with his precise ancestry and allies as decisive for the whole of Russia absurd

    And yet you chose to minimize Yaroslav’s Scandinavian connection by stating “Yaroslav, like his predecessors, used sometimes Scandinavian, sometimes Polish or Polovtsian exiled potentates with their followers as part of his retinue” when in reality Yaroslav was much more dependent on Scandinavian troops and alliance than he was on any of the other ones.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  70. AP says:
    @5371
    When Louis-Philippe called himself "King of the French" rather than "King of France" as his predecessors had, it did not mean that the French state had been replaced. In the same way, though from the end of the twelfth century French monarchs used the title of "King of France" alongside the original "King of the Franks", that does not mean the monarchy itself started or changed with Philippe Auguste.

    We can each propose various ideas about when France came to exist; these don’t count for much.

    Whatever your personal arguments, the consensus of modern scholars, seen in numerous sources I’ve already linked to during our discussion (Britannica, various books published by university presses), is that the Kingdom of the Franks, or Frankia, was not France, and its rulers were not Frenchmen but Franks. Indeed, the sources explicitly write that France later arose later from these Frankish states. Clovis, Pepin, Charles Martel, Charlemagne are almost everywhere described as Frankish not as French kings. The sources start describing “France” alongside the rise of the Capetians starting in the 10th century.

    Yet another example, “France in the Making”, Oxford University Press

    “Covering the centuries between the disintegration of the Carolingian empire and the rise of the French monarchy, this book traces the long period of gestation that ended with the emergence of the kingdom of France as a recognizable political entity capable of inspiring the loyalty of its peoples. The author describes the emergence in the late ninth and tenth centuries of principalities and lesser political units in which the personal qualities or resources of the rulers permitted them to command obedience. In the eleventh century, the threat of political fragmentation led princes to establish sounder theoretical foundations for their authority in legal and administrative procedures. The twelfth-century kings of France, hitherto little more than princes of the Ile-de-France, exploited the state-building activities of their princes to re-establish their own lordship over all the princes, counts, and bishops within their realm. At the same time, they contrived to identify themselves in their subjects’ imaginations with the dawning sense of French community. By 1180 the kingdom of France was firmly established, both on the map of Europe and in the minds of its inhabitants.”

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  71. @5371
    Yaroslav lost the battle against Mstislav, and the brothers came to a peace agreement; then, as already for many years, the prince of Kiev was merely primus inter pares, which makes the obsession with his precise ancestry and allies as decisive for the whole of Russia absurd.

    Accidental lol.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  72. @AP

    Explain please, how a slave whose name was not Scandinavian, brother which is called non-Scandinavian name, and whose father has not a Scandinavian name , can be considered the daughter of a Scandinavian?
     
    The problem is that the more accepted theory is that the Scandinavian name came first and the Slavs made up a Slavic version.

    As for the names of the rulers:

    1. The numerous Waldemars across Scandinavia itself tell us that Scandinavians liked Slavic names.

    2. You do realize that these people also used Scandinavian names when interacting with their own people. Yarosalv was Jarisleif, for example. In a modern version of this, there are not a small numbers of "Jennifers" in the USA born to Russian parents who are also called "Zhenya."

    Only no need to embarrass this discussion by referencing Wikipedia. Wikipedia is garbage.
     
    If you find another non-Russian source, provide it please.

    http://cyberleninka.ru/article/n/lichnye-imena-povesti-vremennyh-let-kak-otrazhenie-kartiny-mira-srednevekovogo-cheloveka#ixzz4cmoNhaOn”
     
    The problem with using Russian sources on this matter is that they are open to svidomism. One could, for example, use a hundreds-pages book by Hrushevsky, full of footnotes and evidence, to show that the Rus were Slavs (and Ukrainians). So what?

    But it's telling that even Russian sources have mixed views on the topic - some claim that she was a Scandinavian.

    In the absence of other non-Russian sources, I'll have to use wikipedia.

    Western scientists only talk about the Scandinavian origin of the Russian princes after Igor.
     
    Western sources note that Vladimir moved to Scandinavia (exact location, Sweden or Norway, not specified but his troops seemed to have been from Norway) and used Norse troops to seize the throne. Yaroslav was the son of Vladimir and a woman (Ragnhild) whose origins were undisputably Scandinavian. His core forces consisted of Scandinavians in his various conflicts. When Slavs in Novogord killed his Norse allies because they had been abusing Slavs, Yaroslav slaughtered the Slavic nobles. He married a Swedish princess and his Swedish brother-in-law was his main ally in the war against his brother Mstislav. If you think that Yaroslav was a Slav, the Svidomism is strong in you, indeed.

    The problem is that the more accepted theory is that the Scandinavian name came first and the Slavs made up a Slavic version.

    That is, the names Jaroslav, Yaropolk, Svyatoslav, etc. are derived from Scandinavian languages? Cool hypothesis. Please give examples of the use of these names by Scandinavians.

    Read More
    • Replies: @AP

    That is, the names Jaroslav, Yaropolk, Svyatoslav, etc. are derived from Scandinavian language
     
    We were discussing Malfrid, remember?

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Malusha

    As the chronicles are silent on the subject of Malusha’s pedigree, 19th-century Russian and Ukrainian historians devised various theories to explain her parentage and name.

    “Alexei Shakhmatov considered Malusha to be the daughter of Mstisha Sveneldovich, son of Sveneld, a Varangian warlord. He believed that the name Malusha was a slavinized version of a Scandinavian name Malfried.[4] In this case, Malusha was of Norse origin.[5] The Primary Chronicle records that a certain Malfried died in 1000. This record follows that of Rogneda’s death. Since Rogneda was Vladimir’s wife, historians assume that Malfried was another close relative of the ruling prince, preferably his wife or mother.

    The anti-Normanist historian Dmitry Ilovaisky managed to draw an opposite conclusion: that the Slavic name Malusha was turned into a Scandinavian Malfried. This claim received no wider support.”
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  73. AP says:
    @melanf

    The problem is that the more accepted theory is that the Scandinavian name came first and the Slavs made up a Slavic version.
     
    That is, the names Jaroslav, Yaropolk, Svyatoslav, etc. are derived from Scandinavian languages? Cool hypothesis. Please give examples of the use of these names by Scandinavians.

    That is, the names Jaroslav, Yaropolk, Svyatoslav, etc. are derived from Scandinavian language

    We were discussing Malfrid, remember?

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Malusha

    As the chronicles are silent on the subject of Malusha’s pedigree, 19th-century Russian and Ukrainian historians devised various theories to explain her parentage and name.

    “Alexei Shakhmatov considered Malusha to be the daughter of Mstisha Sveneldovich, son of Sveneld, a Varangian warlord. He believed that the name Malusha was a slavinized version of a Scandinavian name Malfried.[4] In this case, Malusha was of Norse origin.[5] The Primary Chronicle records that a certain Malfried died in 1000. This record follows that of Rogneda’s death. Since Rogneda was Vladimir’s wife, historians assume that Malfried was another close relative of the ruling prince, preferably his wife or mother.

    The anti-Normanist historian Dmitry Ilovaisky managed to draw an opposite conclusion: that the Slavic name Malusha was turned into a Scandinavian Malfried. This claim received no wider support.”

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  74. @AP

    Explain please, how a slave whose name was not Scandinavian, brother which is called non-Scandinavian name, and whose father has not a Scandinavian name , can be considered the daughter of a Scandinavian?
     
    The problem is that the more accepted theory is that the Scandinavian name came first and the Slavs made up a Slavic version.

    As for the names of the rulers:

    1. The numerous Waldemars across Scandinavia itself tell us that Scandinavians liked Slavic names.

    2. You do realize that these people also used Scandinavian names when interacting with their own people. Yarosalv was Jarisleif, for example. In a modern version of this, there are not a small numbers of "Jennifers" in the USA born to Russian parents who are also called "Zhenya."

    Only no need to embarrass this discussion by referencing Wikipedia. Wikipedia is garbage.
     
    If you find another non-Russian source, provide it please.

    http://cyberleninka.ru/article/n/lichnye-imena-povesti-vremennyh-let-kak-otrazhenie-kartiny-mira-srednevekovogo-cheloveka#ixzz4cmoNhaOn”
     
    The problem with using Russian sources on this matter is that they are open to svidomism. One could, for example, use a hundreds-pages book by Hrushevsky, full of footnotes and evidence, to show that the Rus were Slavs (and Ukrainians). So what?

    But it's telling that even Russian sources have mixed views on the topic - some claim that she was a Scandinavian.

    In the absence of other non-Russian sources, I'll have to use wikipedia.

    Western scientists only talk about the Scandinavian origin of the Russian princes after Igor.
     
    Western sources note that Vladimir moved to Scandinavia (exact location, Sweden or Norway, not specified but his troops seemed to have been from Norway) and used Norse troops to seize the throne. Yaroslav was the son of Vladimir and a woman (Ragnhild) whose origins were undisputably Scandinavian. His core forces consisted of Scandinavians in his various conflicts. When Slavs in Novogord killed his Norse allies because they had been abusing Slavs, Yaroslav slaughtered the Slavic nobles. He married a Swedish princess and his Swedish brother-in-law was his main ally in the war against his brother Mstislav. If you think that Yaroslav was a Slav, the Svidomism is strong in you, indeed.

    The problem is that the more accepted theory is that the Scandinavian name came first and the Slavs made up a Slavic version.

    That is, the names Jaroslav, Yaropolk, Svyatoslav, etc. are derived from Scandinavian languages? Cool hypothesis. Please give examples of the use of these names by Scandinavians.

    As for the names of the rulers:
    1. The numerous Waldemars across Scandinavia itself tell us that Scandinavians liked Slavic names.

    The numerous Olegs, Rjuriks and Glebs among Russian Princes itself tell us that Slavic liked Scandinavians names. For example Rurik Rostislavich Grand Prince of Kiev in XIII century, Oleg Ivanovich Prince of Ryazan XIV century. In such a case, based on your logic, we should assume that all holders of Scandinavian names are Slavs?

    You do realize that these people also used Scandinavian names when interacting with their own people. Yarosalv was Jarisleif, for example.

    Jarisleif is not Scandinavian name it is a Slavic name, which was written by Scandinavians. Similarly in Russian chronicles the Scandinavian name Helge turned to Oleg, Hakon in the Jakun, etc.

    In the absence of other non-Russian sources, I’ll have to use wikipedia.

    In Russian, such “methods” of analysis famous as folk-history.

    Western sources note that Vladimir moved to Scandinavia (exact location, Sweden or Norway, not specified but his troops seemed to have been from Norway) and used Norse troops to seize the throne.
    Yaroslav was the son of Vladimir and a woman (Ragnhild) whose origins were undisputably Scandinavian. His core forces consisted of Scandinavians in his various conflicts.

    4 Norwegian King (Olav Trjuggvason, Saint Olav, Magnus Olavsson, Harald Sigurdarson) were in exile in Russia, and regained the throne with the support of Russian Princes. These Norwegian Kings by your logic the Slavs?

    The greatest Scandinavian King Cnut the Great was the son of the Danish King, and daughter of a Slavic prince. Against enemies (mostly other Scandinavians) he used Slavic warriors. Cnut the Great by your logic – Slavs?

    When Slavs in Novogord killed his Norse allies because they had been abusing Slavs, Yaroslav slaughtered the Slavic nobles.

    And then he begged citizens of Novgorod for forgiveness.

    If you think that Yaroslav was a Slav, the Svidomism is strong in you, indeed.

    Yaroslav’s sons names:
    Vladimir
    Izyaslav
    Svyatoslav
    Vsevolod
    Vyacheslav
    Igor

    Yaroslav undoubtedly was a Slav (though Scandinavian origin). He, among others, public affairs, amounted to a compendium of laws. Guess what language?

    Read More
    • Replies: @AP

    "The problem is that the more accepted theory is that the Scandinavian name came first and the Slavs made up a Slavic version."

    That is, the names Jaroslav, Yaropolk, Svyatoslav, etc. are derived from Scandinavian languages? Cool hypothesis. Please give examples of the use of these names by Scandinavians.
     

    We were discussing Malfrid, remember? Not the other ones.

    As for the names of the rulers:
    1. The numerous Waldemars across Scandinavia itself tell us that Scandinavians liked Slavic names.

    The numerous Olegs, Rjuriks and Glebs among Russian Princes itself tell us that Slavic liked Scandinavians names. For example Rurik Rostislavich Grand Prince of Kiev in XIII century, Oleg Ivanovich Prince of Ryazan XIV century. In such a case, based on your logic, we should assume that all holders of Scandinavian names are Slavs?
     

    The logical conclusion is that whether the name is Slavic or Scandinavian does not determine ethnicity, because Slavs could have Scandinavian names and Scandinavian could have Slavic ones.

    You do realize that these people also used Scandinavian names when interacting with their own people. Yarosalv was Jarisleif, for example.

    Jarisleif is not Scandinavian name it is a Slavic name, which was written by Scandinavians. Similarly in Russian chronicles the Scandinavian name Helge turned to Oleg, Hakon in the Jakun, etc.
     

    Now review what I wrote. When Yaroslav was with his own, Scandinavian people, he went by Jarisleif (see the Sagas). Likewise with Hakon, Helga, Ingvar (Igor), etc.

    Norwegian King (Olav Trjuggvason, Saint Olav, Magnus Olavsson, Harald Sigurdarson) were in exile in Russia, and regained the throne with the support of Russian Princes. These Norwegian Kings by your logic the Slavs?
     
    Since the state they were exiled to (Rus) was a Scandinavian state, why would this make them Slavs? This fact further supports the Scandinavian nature of Rus. Scandinavians felt at home going into exile there. Just as Rus leaders sometimes felt at home going into exile in Scandinavia. And I love how in your Russian svidomism you refer to this state as Russian.

    The greatest Scandinavian King Cnut the Great was the son of the Danish King, and daughter of a Slavic prince. Against enemies (mostly other Scandinavians) he used Slavic warriors. Cnut the Great by your logic – Slavs?
     
    While Cnut did use some Polish troops he did not depend on Polish troops nearly as much as did Vladimir and Yaroslav on Norse troops.

    When Slavs in Novogord killed his Norse allies because they had been abusing Slavs, Yaroslav slaughtered the Slavic nobles.

    And then he begged citizens of Novgorod for forgiveness.
     

    That's nice. He had to rule over them, after all.

    If you think that Yaroslav was a Slav, the Svidomism is strong in you, indeed.

    Yaroslav’s sons names:
    Vladimir
    Izyaslav
    Svyatoslav
    Vsevolod
    Vyacheslav
    Igor

    Yaroslav undoubtedly was a Slav (though Scandinavian origin)
     

    We already discussed names - Scandinavians liked Slavic names and Slavs liked Scandinavian ones. To review, Yaroslav was 100% Scandinavian (likely - but possibly "only" 75% Scandinavian). In various phases of his career he relied on Norse troops in his wars - most of his closest allies were fellow-Scandinavians. He provided a home for Norse exiles. When Slavs rebelled against Yaroslav's Scandinavians, Yaroslav slaughtered the Slavs (but apologized to the survivors). He married a Swedish princess. But strong Russian Svidomite claims Yaroslav was a Slav, and a Russian too :-)

    He, among others, public affairs, amounted to a compendium of laws. Guess what language?
     
    No originals of Pravda Yaroslava exist - the Ruska Pravda, was completed two generations later, the oldest copy is from 1282. I wouldn't doubt if the law were written in Slavic, given that the population whom the Scandinavians ruled was Slavic. But because the rulers were Scandinavians, the law itself was very Norse in type. It replaced vengeance killing with the collection of weregild, brought about Scandinavian-type jury trials, etc. If Yaroslav was a Slav, why were his laws Norse?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  75. AP says:
    @melanf

    The problem is that the more accepted theory is that the Scandinavian name came first and the Slavs made up a Slavic version.
     
    That is, the names Jaroslav, Yaropolk, Svyatoslav, etc. are derived from Scandinavian languages? Cool hypothesis. Please give examples of the use of these names by Scandinavians.

    As for the names of the rulers:
    1. The numerous Waldemars across Scandinavia itself tell us that Scandinavians liked Slavic names.
     
    The numerous Olegs, Rjuriks and Glebs among Russian Princes itself tell us that Slavic liked Scandinavians names. For example Rurik Rostislavich Grand Prince of Kiev in XIII century, Oleg Ivanovich Prince of Ryazan XIV century. In such a case, based on your logic, we should assume that all holders of Scandinavian names are Slavs?

    You do realize that these people also used Scandinavian names when interacting with their own people. Yarosalv was Jarisleif, for example.
     
    Jarisleif is not Scandinavian name it is a Slavic name, which was written by Scandinavians. Similarly in Russian chronicles the Scandinavian name Helge turned to Oleg, Hakon in the Jakun, etc.

    In the absence of other non-Russian sources, I’ll have to use wikipedia.
     
    In Russian, such “methods” of analysis famous as folk-history.

    Western sources note that Vladimir moved to Scandinavia (exact location, Sweden or Norway, not specified but his troops seemed to have been from Norway) and used Norse troops to seize the throne.
    Yaroslav was the son of Vladimir and a woman (Ragnhild) whose origins were undisputably Scandinavian. His core forces consisted of Scandinavians in his various conflicts.
     
    4 Norwegian King (Olav Trjuggvason, Saint Olav, Magnus Olavsson, Harald Sigurdarson) were in exile in Russia, and regained the throne with the support of Russian Princes. These Norwegian Kings by your logic the Slavs?

    The greatest Scandinavian King Cnut the Great was the son of the Danish King, and daughter of a Slavic prince. Against enemies (mostly other Scandinavians) he used Slavic warriors. Cnut the Great by your logic - Slavs?


    When Slavs in Novogord killed his Norse allies because they had been abusing Slavs, Yaroslav slaughtered the Slavic nobles.
     
    And then he begged citizens of Novgorod for forgiveness.

    If you think that Yaroslav was a Slav, the Svidomism is strong in you, indeed.
     
    Yaroslav's sons names:
    Vladimir
    Izyaslav
    Svyatoslav
    Vsevolod
    Vyacheslav
    Igor

    Yaroslav undoubtedly was a Slav (though Scandinavian origin). He, among others, public affairs, amounted to a compendium of laws. Guess what language?

    “The problem is that the more accepted theory is that the Scandinavian name came first and the Slavs made up a Slavic version.”

    That is, the names Jaroslav, Yaropolk, Svyatoslav, etc. are derived from Scandinavian languages? Cool hypothesis. Please give examples of the use of these names by Scandinavians.

    We were discussing Malfrid, remember? Not the other ones.

    As for the names of the rulers:
    1. The numerous Waldemars across Scandinavia itself tell us that Scandinavians liked Slavic names.

    The numerous Olegs, Rjuriks and Glebs among Russian Princes itself tell us that Slavic liked Scandinavians names. For example Rurik Rostislavich Grand Prince of Kiev in XIII century, Oleg Ivanovich Prince of Ryazan XIV century. In such a case, based on your logic, we should assume that all holders of Scandinavian names are Slavs?

    The logical conclusion is that whether the name is Slavic or Scandinavian does not determine ethnicity, because Slavs could have Scandinavian names and Scandinavian could have Slavic ones.

    You do realize that these people also used Scandinavian names when interacting with their own people. Yarosalv was Jarisleif, for example.

    Jarisleif is not Scandinavian name it is a Slavic name, which was written by Scandinavians. Similarly in Russian chronicles the Scandinavian name Helge turned to Oleg, Hakon in the Jakun, etc.

    Now review what I wrote. When Yaroslav was with his own, Scandinavian people, he went by Jarisleif (see the Sagas). Likewise with Hakon, Helga, Ingvar (Igor), etc.

    Norwegian King (Olav Trjuggvason, Saint Olav, Magnus Olavsson, Harald Sigurdarson) were in exile in Russia, and regained the throne with the support of Russian Princes. These Norwegian Kings by your logic the Slavs?

    Since the state they were exiled to (Rus) was a Scandinavian state, why would this make them Slavs? This fact further supports the Scandinavian nature of Rus. Scandinavians felt at home going into exile there. Just as Rus leaders sometimes felt at home going into exile in Scandinavia. And I love how in your Russian svidomism you refer to this state as Russian.

    The greatest Scandinavian King Cnut the Great was the son of the Danish King, and daughter of a Slavic prince. Against enemies (mostly other Scandinavians) he used Slavic warriors. Cnut the Great by your logic – Slavs?

    While Cnut did use some Polish troops he did not depend on Polish troops nearly as much as did Vladimir and Yaroslav on Norse troops.

    When Slavs in Novogord killed his Norse allies because they had been abusing Slavs, Yaroslav slaughtered the Slavic nobles.

    And then he begged citizens of Novgorod for forgiveness.

    That’s nice. He had to rule over them, after all.

    If you think that Yaroslav was a Slav, the Svidomism is strong in you, indeed.

    Yaroslav’s sons names:
    Vladimir
    Izyaslav
    Svyatoslav
    Vsevolod
    Vyacheslav
    Igor

    Yaroslav undoubtedly was a Slav (though Scandinavian origin)

    We already discussed names – Scandinavians liked Slavic names and Slavs liked Scandinavian ones. To review, Yaroslav was 100% Scandinavian (likely – but possibly “only” 75% Scandinavian). In various phases of his career he relied on Norse troops in his wars – most of his closest allies were fellow-Scandinavians. He provided a home for Norse exiles. When Slavs rebelled against Yaroslav’s Scandinavians, Yaroslav slaughtered the Slavs (but apologized to the survivors). He married a Swedish princess. But strong Russian Svidomite claims Yaroslav was a Slav, and a Russian too :-)

    He, among others, public affairs, amounted to a compendium of laws. Guess what language?

    No originals of Pravda Yaroslava exist – the Ruska Pravda, was completed two generations later, the oldest copy is from 1282. I wouldn’t doubt if the law were written in Slavic, given that the population whom the Scandinavians ruled was Slavic. But because the rulers were Scandinavians, the law itself was very Norse in type. It replaced vengeance killing with the collection of weregild, brought about Scandinavian-type jury trials, etc. If Yaroslav was a Slav, why were his laws Norse?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Guy
    Superstrate influence: the Norse law played an outsized role because many of the druzhina were Norse or of norse descent. Also, Yaroslavs Slavs ancestry does not preclude using Norse troops; Pennisular Scandinavia is a shit land for agriculture and given widespread polygamy, many warriors would flock outwards for better opportunities. The Norse warriors were like Turks; a column to defend against Slavic intertribal conflict, and Yaroslav's Norse connections made this even easier. The vast bulk of Norse came from Sweden, not Norway, though. However,the Norse warriors had mostly Slav wife's and concubines, as did Yaroslav. Also AP, as a Ukrainian, your claims of svidomism are strange, though, given that the volyhians and drevylans were very disadvantaged in influence compared to the ilmen Slavs of the northern Slav lands, who were the original supporters of the Rus
    , @melanf


    The greatest Scandinavian King Cnut the Great was the son of the Danish King, and daughter of a Slavic prince. Against enemies (mostly other Scandinavians) he used Slavic warriors. Cnut the Great by your logic – Slavs?
     
    While Cnut did use some Polish troops he did not depend on Polish troops nearly as much as did Vladimir and Yaroslav on Norse troops.
     
    Nonsense
    Primary chronicles :
    « Yaroslav collected one thousand Varangians and forty thousand other soldiers, and marched against Svyatopolk. When Svyatopolk learned that Yaroslav was on his way, he prepared an innumerable army of Russes and Pechenegs and marched out toward Lyubech128 on one side of the Dnieper, while Yaroslav was on the opposite bank. Brothers stood over against each other on both banks on the Dnieper, but neither party dared attack. They remained thus face to face for three months. Then Svyatopolk's general rode out along the shore and scoffed at the men of Novgorod, shouting, "Why did you come hither with this crooked-shanks, you carpenters?129 We shall put you to work on our houses." Vhen the men of Novgorod heard this taunt, they declared to Yaroslav, "Tomorrow we will cross over to them, and whoever will not go with us we will kill." Now it was already beginning to freeze. Svyatopolk was stationed between two lakes, and caroused with his fellows the whole night through. Yaroslav on the morrow marshaled his troops, and crossed over toward dawn. His forces disembarked on the shore, and pushed the boats out from the bank. The two armies advanced to the attack, and met upon the field. The carnage was terrible. Because of the lake, the Pechenegs could bring no aid, and Yaroslav's troops drove Svyatopolk with his followers toward it. When the latter went out upon the ice, it broke under them, and Yaroslav began to win the upper hand. Svyatopolk then fled among the Lyakhs, while Yaroslav established himself in Kiev upon the throne of his father and his grandfather.»

    Scandinavian mercenaries made up a fifth of the forces of Yaroslav. The outcome of the war decided by the Novgorod army, not the Scandinavians. The participation of Scandinavians in the decisive battle is not mentioned at all


    He (Yaroslav) had to rule over them (men of Novgorod), after all.
     
    Really? It is rather the men of Novgorod rule
    «Then Yaroslav fled with four men to Novgorod, and Boleslav entered Kiev in company with Svyatopolk. When Yaroslav arrived at Novgorod in his flight, he planned to escape overseas, but the Posadnik (mayor) Constantine, son of Dobrynya, together with the men of Novgorod, destroyed his boat, protesting that they wished to fight once more against Boleslav and Svyatopolk. They set out to gather funds ….»

    Pravda Yaroslava exist – the Ruska Pravda, …w itself was very Norse in type. It replaced vengeance killing with the collection of weregild, brought about Scandinavian-type jury trials, etc. If Yaroslav was a Slav, why were his laws Norse?
     
    Nonsense
    Collection of «weregild», jury trials and so on was a common features of the barbaric laws (such as Salic law) reflecting the views of early medieval tribes about justice. Of course Pravda Yaroslava is a fully Slavic laws, as a write Slavic language, and used Slavic terms. In this law there is Absolutely no privilege for Scandinavians (in contrast to the Salic law which established special rights of the Germans).

    But strong Russian Svidomite claims Yaroslav was a Slav, and a Russian too
     
    Yaroslav was undoubtedly a Slav. Of course the Scandinavians sometimes had Slavic names, and the Slavs had sometimes Scandinavian names. But when a whole dynasty of Rurikovich (in the era of Yaroslav) consisting dozens of people had almost exclusively Slavic names - this dynasty is undoubtedly Slavic. The origin in this case plays no role, as it doesn't matter the pure-blood-line German origin of Nicholas I or Queen Victoria

    Since the state they were exiled to (Rus) was a Scandinavian state
     
    Nonsense
    The state where the ruling dynasty has exclusively Slavic names, all aristocratic titles - Slavic, laws - Slavic, the written language is Slavic. Books that have been written for the princes https://fs00.infourok.ru/images/doc/196/223696/img31.jpg of the Slavic language, too. Troops in the vast majority - Slavic. And, icing on the cake, in Kiev was installed (by Prince Vladimir) state cult of Slavic gods, with human sacrifice. For the sake of the Slavic gods, the pagan priests killed....Scandinavians.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  76. Guy says:
    @AP

    "The problem is that the more accepted theory is that the Scandinavian name came first and the Slavs made up a Slavic version."

    That is, the names Jaroslav, Yaropolk, Svyatoslav, etc. are derived from Scandinavian languages? Cool hypothesis. Please give examples of the use of these names by Scandinavians.
     

    We were discussing Malfrid, remember? Not the other ones.

    As for the names of the rulers:
    1. The numerous Waldemars across Scandinavia itself tell us that Scandinavians liked Slavic names.

    The numerous Olegs, Rjuriks and Glebs among Russian Princes itself tell us that Slavic liked Scandinavians names. For example Rurik Rostislavich Grand Prince of Kiev in XIII century, Oleg Ivanovich Prince of Ryazan XIV century. In such a case, based on your logic, we should assume that all holders of Scandinavian names are Slavs?
     

    The logical conclusion is that whether the name is Slavic or Scandinavian does not determine ethnicity, because Slavs could have Scandinavian names and Scandinavian could have Slavic ones.

    You do realize that these people also used Scandinavian names when interacting with their own people. Yarosalv was Jarisleif, for example.

    Jarisleif is not Scandinavian name it is a Slavic name, which was written by Scandinavians. Similarly in Russian chronicles the Scandinavian name Helge turned to Oleg, Hakon in the Jakun, etc.
     

    Now review what I wrote. When Yaroslav was with his own, Scandinavian people, he went by Jarisleif (see the Sagas). Likewise with Hakon, Helga, Ingvar (Igor), etc.

    Norwegian King (Olav Trjuggvason, Saint Olav, Magnus Olavsson, Harald Sigurdarson) were in exile in Russia, and regained the throne with the support of Russian Princes. These Norwegian Kings by your logic the Slavs?
     
    Since the state they were exiled to (Rus) was a Scandinavian state, why would this make them Slavs? This fact further supports the Scandinavian nature of Rus. Scandinavians felt at home going into exile there. Just as Rus leaders sometimes felt at home going into exile in Scandinavia. And I love how in your Russian svidomism you refer to this state as Russian.

    The greatest Scandinavian King Cnut the Great was the son of the Danish King, and daughter of a Slavic prince. Against enemies (mostly other Scandinavians) he used Slavic warriors. Cnut the Great by your logic – Slavs?
     
    While Cnut did use some Polish troops he did not depend on Polish troops nearly as much as did Vladimir and Yaroslav on Norse troops.

    When Slavs in Novogord killed his Norse allies because they had been abusing Slavs, Yaroslav slaughtered the Slavic nobles.

    And then he begged citizens of Novgorod for forgiveness.
     

    That's nice. He had to rule over them, after all.

    If you think that Yaroslav was a Slav, the Svidomism is strong in you, indeed.

    Yaroslav’s sons names:
    Vladimir
    Izyaslav
    Svyatoslav
    Vsevolod
    Vyacheslav
    Igor

    Yaroslav undoubtedly was a Slav (though Scandinavian origin)
     

    We already discussed names - Scandinavians liked Slavic names and Slavs liked Scandinavian ones. To review, Yaroslav was 100% Scandinavian (likely - but possibly "only" 75% Scandinavian). In various phases of his career he relied on Norse troops in his wars - most of his closest allies were fellow-Scandinavians. He provided a home for Norse exiles. When Slavs rebelled against Yaroslav's Scandinavians, Yaroslav slaughtered the Slavs (but apologized to the survivors). He married a Swedish princess. But strong Russian Svidomite claims Yaroslav was a Slav, and a Russian too :-)

    He, among others, public affairs, amounted to a compendium of laws. Guess what language?
     
    No originals of Pravda Yaroslava exist - the Ruska Pravda, was completed two generations later, the oldest copy is from 1282. I wouldn't doubt if the law were written in Slavic, given that the population whom the Scandinavians ruled was Slavic. But because the rulers were Scandinavians, the law itself was very Norse in type. It replaced vengeance killing with the collection of weregild, brought about Scandinavian-type jury trials, etc. If Yaroslav was a Slav, why were his laws Norse?

    Superstrate influence: the Norse law played an outsized role because many of the druzhina were Norse or of norse descent. Also, Yaroslavs Slavs ancestry does not preclude using Norse troops; Pennisular Scandinavia is a shit land for agriculture and given widespread polygamy, many warriors would flock outwards for better opportunities. The Norse warriors were like Turks; a column to defend against Slavic intertribal conflict, and Yaroslav’s Norse connections made this even easier. The vast bulk of Norse came from Sweden, not Norway, though. However,the Norse warriors had mostly Slav wife’s and concubines, as did Yaroslav. Also AP, as a Ukrainian, your claims of svidomism are strange, though, given that the volyhians and drevylans were very disadvantaged in influence compared to the ilmen Slavs of the northern Slav lands, who were the original supporters of the Rus

    Read More
    • Replies: @AP

    However,the Norse warriors had mostly Slav wife’s and concubines, as did Yaroslav.
     
    Correct, although Yaroslav's wife Ingegerd Olofsdotter was Swedish.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  77. @Guy
    Superstrate influence: the Norse law played an outsized role because many of the druzhina were Norse or of norse descent. Also, Yaroslavs Slavs ancestry does not preclude using Norse troops; Pennisular Scandinavia is a shit land for agriculture and given widespread polygamy, many warriors would flock outwards for better opportunities. The Norse warriors were like Turks; a column to defend against Slavic intertribal conflict, and Yaroslav's Norse connections made this even easier. The vast bulk of Norse came from Sweden, not Norway, though. However,the Norse warriors had mostly Slav wife's and concubines, as did Yaroslav. Also AP, as a Ukrainian, your claims of svidomism are strange, though, given that the volyhians and drevylans were very disadvantaged in influence compared to the ilmen Slavs of the northern Slav lands, who were the original supporters of the Rus

    However,the Norse warriors had mostly Slav wife’s and concubines, as did Yaroslav.

    Correct, although Yaroslav’s wife Ingegerd Olofsdotter was Swedish.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  78. @AP

    "The problem is that the more accepted theory is that the Scandinavian name came first and the Slavs made up a Slavic version."

    That is, the names Jaroslav, Yaropolk, Svyatoslav, etc. are derived from Scandinavian languages? Cool hypothesis. Please give examples of the use of these names by Scandinavians.
     

    We were discussing Malfrid, remember? Not the other ones.

    As for the names of the rulers:
    1. The numerous Waldemars across Scandinavia itself tell us that Scandinavians liked Slavic names.

    The numerous Olegs, Rjuriks and Glebs among Russian Princes itself tell us that Slavic liked Scandinavians names. For example Rurik Rostislavich Grand Prince of Kiev in XIII century, Oleg Ivanovich Prince of Ryazan XIV century. In such a case, based on your logic, we should assume that all holders of Scandinavian names are Slavs?
     

    The logical conclusion is that whether the name is Slavic or Scandinavian does not determine ethnicity, because Slavs could have Scandinavian names and Scandinavian could have Slavic ones.

    You do realize that these people also used Scandinavian names when interacting with their own people. Yarosalv was Jarisleif, for example.

    Jarisleif is not Scandinavian name it is a Slavic name, which was written by Scandinavians. Similarly in Russian chronicles the Scandinavian name Helge turned to Oleg, Hakon in the Jakun, etc.
     

    Now review what I wrote. When Yaroslav was with his own, Scandinavian people, he went by Jarisleif (see the Sagas). Likewise with Hakon, Helga, Ingvar (Igor), etc.

    Norwegian King (Olav Trjuggvason, Saint Olav, Magnus Olavsson, Harald Sigurdarson) were in exile in Russia, and regained the throne with the support of Russian Princes. These Norwegian Kings by your logic the Slavs?
     
    Since the state they were exiled to (Rus) was a Scandinavian state, why would this make them Slavs? This fact further supports the Scandinavian nature of Rus. Scandinavians felt at home going into exile there. Just as Rus leaders sometimes felt at home going into exile in Scandinavia. And I love how in your Russian svidomism you refer to this state as Russian.

    The greatest Scandinavian King Cnut the Great was the son of the Danish King, and daughter of a Slavic prince. Against enemies (mostly other Scandinavians) he used Slavic warriors. Cnut the Great by your logic – Slavs?
     
    While Cnut did use some Polish troops he did not depend on Polish troops nearly as much as did Vladimir and Yaroslav on Norse troops.

    When Slavs in Novogord killed his Norse allies because they had been abusing Slavs, Yaroslav slaughtered the Slavic nobles.

    And then he begged citizens of Novgorod for forgiveness.
     

    That's nice. He had to rule over them, after all.

    If you think that Yaroslav was a Slav, the Svidomism is strong in you, indeed.

    Yaroslav’s sons names:
    Vladimir
    Izyaslav
    Svyatoslav
    Vsevolod
    Vyacheslav
    Igor

    Yaroslav undoubtedly was a Slav (though Scandinavian origin)
     

    We already discussed names - Scandinavians liked Slavic names and Slavs liked Scandinavian ones. To review, Yaroslav was 100% Scandinavian (likely - but possibly "only" 75% Scandinavian). In various phases of his career he relied on Norse troops in his wars - most of his closest allies were fellow-Scandinavians. He provided a home for Norse exiles. When Slavs rebelled against Yaroslav's Scandinavians, Yaroslav slaughtered the Slavs (but apologized to the survivors). He married a Swedish princess. But strong Russian Svidomite claims Yaroslav was a Slav, and a Russian too :-)

    He, among others, public affairs, amounted to a compendium of laws. Guess what language?
     
    No originals of Pravda Yaroslava exist - the Ruska Pravda, was completed two generations later, the oldest copy is from 1282. I wouldn't doubt if the law were written in Slavic, given that the population whom the Scandinavians ruled was Slavic. But because the rulers were Scandinavians, the law itself was very Norse in type. It replaced vengeance killing with the collection of weregild, brought about Scandinavian-type jury trials, etc. If Yaroslav was a Slav, why were his laws Norse?

    The greatest Scandinavian King Cnut the Great was the son of the Danish King, and daughter of a Slavic prince. Against enemies (mostly other Scandinavians) he used Slavic warriors. Cnut the Great by your logic – Slavs?

    While Cnut did use some Polish troops he did not depend on Polish troops nearly as much as did Vladimir and Yaroslav on Norse troops.

    Nonsense
    Primary chronicles :
    « Yaroslav collected one thousand Varangians and forty thousand other soldiers, and marched against Svyatopolk. When Svyatopolk learned that Yaroslav was on his way, he prepared an innumerable army of Russes and Pechenegs and marched out toward Lyubech128 on one side of the Dnieper, while Yaroslav was on the opposite bank. Brothers stood over against each other on both banks on the Dnieper, but neither party dared attack. They remained thus face to face for three months. Then Svyatopolk’s general rode out along the shore and scoffed at the men of Novgorod, shouting, “Why did you come hither with this crooked-shanks, you carpenters?129 We shall put you to work on our houses.” Vhen the men of Novgorod heard this taunt, they declared to Yaroslav, “Tomorrow we will cross over to them, and whoever will not go with us we will kill.” Now it was already beginning to freeze. Svyatopolk was stationed between two lakes, and caroused with his fellows the whole night through. Yaroslav on the morrow marshaled his troops, and crossed over toward dawn. His forces disembarked on the shore, and pushed the boats out from the bank. The two armies advanced to the attack, and met upon the field. The carnage was terrible. Because of the lake, the Pechenegs could bring no aid, and Yaroslav’s troops drove Svyatopolk with his followers toward it. When the latter went out upon the ice, it broke under them, and Yaroslav began to win the upper hand. Svyatopolk then fled among the Lyakhs, while Yaroslav established himself in Kiev upon the throne of his father and his grandfather.»

    Scandinavian mercenaries made up a fifth of the forces of Yaroslav. The outcome of the war decided by the Novgorod army, not the Scandinavians. The participation of Scandinavians in the decisive battle is not mentioned at all

    He (Yaroslav) had to rule over them (men of Novgorod), after all.

    Really? It is rather the men of Novgorod rule
    «Then Yaroslav fled with four men to Novgorod, and Boleslav entered Kiev in company with Svyatopolk. When Yaroslav arrived at Novgorod in his flight, he planned to escape overseas, but the Posadnik (mayor) Constantine, son of Dobrynya, together with the men of Novgorod, destroyed his boat, protesting that they wished to fight once more against Boleslav and Svyatopolk. They set out to gather funds ….»

    Pravda Yaroslava exist – the Ruska Pravda, …w itself was very Norse in type. It replaced vengeance killing with the collection of weregild, brought about Scandinavian-type jury trials, etc. If Yaroslav was a Slav, why were his laws Norse?

    Nonsense
    Collection of «weregild», jury trials and so on was a common features of the barbaric laws (such as Salic law) reflecting the views of early medieval tribes about justice. Of course Pravda Yaroslava is a fully Slavic laws, as a write Slavic language, and used Slavic terms. In this law there is Absolutely no privilege for Scandinavians (in contrast to the Salic law which established special rights of the Germans).

    But strong Russian Svidomite claims Yaroslav was a Slav, and a Russian too

    Yaroslav was undoubtedly a Slav. Of course the Scandinavians sometimes had Slavic names, and the Slavs had sometimes Scandinavian names. But when a whole dynasty of Rurikovich (in the era of Yaroslav) consisting dozens of people had almost exclusively Slavic names – this dynasty is undoubtedly Slavic. The origin in this case plays no role, as it doesn’t matter the pure-blood-line German origin of Nicholas I or Queen Victoria

    Since the state they were exiled to (Rus) was a Scandinavian state

    Nonsense
    The state where the ruling dynasty has exclusively Slavic names, all aristocratic titles – Slavic, laws – Slavic, the written language is Slavic. Books that have been written for the princesof the Slavic language, too. Troops in the vast majority – Slavic. And, icing on the cake, in Kiev was installed (by Prince Vladimir) state cult of Slavic gods, with human sacrifice. For the sake of the Slavic gods, the pagan priests killed….Scandinavians.

    Read More
    • Replies: @AP

    Scandinavian mercenaries made up a fifth of the forces of Yaroslav.
     
    Your post proves my point. The core professional soldiers were the 1,000 Scandinavians, the 4,000 Slavic Novgorodians were the assembled militia, carpenters and such.

    You also ignored Yaroslav's reliance on Scandinavians in his war against Mstislav. Why?


    Collection of «weregild», jury trials and so on was a common features of the barbaric laws (such as Salic law) reflecting the views of early medieval tribes about justice.
     
    It was a common feature of Germanic barbaric laws. It wasn't a Slavic thing. The Norse were, of course, Germanic. Same with jury trials, another Norse thing. The law was written in Slavic because the population was mostly Slavic but the writer was a Scandinavian and the law that this Scandinavian ruler created followed Norse legal norms.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russkaya_Pravda

    In spite of great influence of Byzantine legislation on the contemporary world, and in spite of great cultural and commercial ties between Byzantium and Rus', the Russkaya Pravda bore no similarity whatever to that of the Byzantine Empire. The absence of capital and corporal punishment rather reflects the Norse way of thought.

    Wikipedia links to this book.


    And, icing on the cake, in Kiev was installed (by Prince Vladimir) state cult of Slavic gods,
     
    Oops. Before Christianity Vladimir followed the Norse, not Slavic pagan religion. A real |Slav, right? :-)

    Link about Vladimir's Norse religion is here.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  79. AP says:
    @melanf


    The greatest Scandinavian King Cnut the Great was the son of the Danish King, and daughter of a Slavic prince. Against enemies (mostly other Scandinavians) he used Slavic warriors. Cnut the Great by your logic – Slavs?
     
    While Cnut did use some Polish troops he did not depend on Polish troops nearly as much as did Vladimir and Yaroslav on Norse troops.
     
    Nonsense
    Primary chronicles :
    « Yaroslav collected one thousand Varangians and forty thousand other soldiers, and marched against Svyatopolk. When Svyatopolk learned that Yaroslav was on his way, he prepared an innumerable army of Russes and Pechenegs and marched out toward Lyubech128 on one side of the Dnieper, while Yaroslav was on the opposite bank. Brothers stood over against each other on both banks on the Dnieper, but neither party dared attack. They remained thus face to face for three months. Then Svyatopolk's general rode out along the shore and scoffed at the men of Novgorod, shouting, "Why did you come hither with this crooked-shanks, you carpenters?129 We shall put you to work on our houses." Vhen the men of Novgorod heard this taunt, they declared to Yaroslav, "Tomorrow we will cross over to them, and whoever will not go with us we will kill." Now it was already beginning to freeze. Svyatopolk was stationed between two lakes, and caroused with his fellows the whole night through. Yaroslav on the morrow marshaled his troops, and crossed over toward dawn. His forces disembarked on the shore, and pushed the boats out from the bank. The two armies advanced to the attack, and met upon the field. The carnage was terrible. Because of the lake, the Pechenegs could bring no aid, and Yaroslav's troops drove Svyatopolk with his followers toward it. When the latter went out upon the ice, it broke under them, and Yaroslav began to win the upper hand. Svyatopolk then fled among the Lyakhs, while Yaroslav established himself in Kiev upon the throne of his father and his grandfather.»

    Scandinavian mercenaries made up a fifth of the forces of Yaroslav. The outcome of the war decided by the Novgorod army, not the Scandinavians. The participation of Scandinavians in the decisive battle is not mentioned at all


    He (Yaroslav) had to rule over them (men of Novgorod), after all.
     
    Really? It is rather the men of Novgorod rule
    «Then Yaroslav fled with four men to Novgorod, and Boleslav entered Kiev in company with Svyatopolk. When Yaroslav arrived at Novgorod in his flight, he planned to escape overseas, but the Posadnik (mayor) Constantine, son of Dobrynya, together with the men of Novgorod, destroyed his boat, protesting that they wished to fight once more against Boleslav and Svyatopolk. They set out to gather funds ….»

    Pravda Yaroslava exist – the Ruska Pravda, …w itself was very Norse in type. It replaced vengeance killing with the collection of weregild, brought about Scandinavian-type jury trials, etc. If Yaroslav was a Slav, why were his laws Norse?
     
    Nonsense
    Collection of «weregild», jury trials and so on was a common features of the barbaric laws (such as Salic law) reflecting the views of early medieval tribes about justice. Of course Pravda Yaroslava is a fully Slavic laws, as a write Slavic language, and used Slavic terms. In this law there is Absolutely no privilege for Scandinavians (in contrast to the Salic law which established special rights of the Germans).

    But strong Russian Svidomite claims Yaroslav was a Slav, and a Russian too
     
    Yaroslav was undoubtedly a Slav. Of course the Scandinavians sometimes had Slavic names, and the Slavs had sometimes Scandinavian names. But when a whole dynasty of Rurikovich (in the era of Yaroslav) consisting dozens of people had almost exclusively Slavic names - this dynasty is undoubtedly Slavic. The origin in this case plays no role, as it doesn't matter the pure-blood-line German origin of Nicholas I or Queen Victoria

    Since the state they were exiled to (Rus) was a Scandinavian state
     
    Nonsense
    The state where the ruling dynasty has exclusively Slavic names, all aristocratic titles - Slavic, laws - Slavic, the written language is Slavic. Books that have been written for the princes https://fs00.infourok.ru/images/doc/196/223696/img31.jpg of the Slavic language, too. Troops in the vast majority - Slavic. And, icing on the cake, in Kiev was installed (by Prince Vladimir) state cult of Slavic gods, with human sacrifice. For the sake of the Slavic gods, the pagan priests killed....Scandinavians.

    Scandinavian mercenaries made up a fifth of the forces of Yaroslav.

    Your post proves my point. The core professional soldiers were the 1,000 Scandinavians, the 4,000 Slavic Novgorodians were the assembled militia, carpenters and such.

    You also ignored Yaroslav’s reliance on Scandinavians in his war against Mstislav. Why?

    Collection of «weregild», jury trials and so on was a common features of the barbaric laws (such as Salic law) reflecting the views of early medieval tribes about justice.

    It was a common feature of Germanic barbaric laws. It wasn’t a Slavic thing. The Norse were, of course, Germanic. Same with jury trials, another Norse thing. The law was written in Slavic because the population was mostly Slavic but the writer was a Scandinavian and the law that this Scandinavian ruler created followed Norse legal norms.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russkaya_Pravda

    In spite of great influence of Byzantine legislation on the contemporary world, and in spite of great cultural and commercial ties between Byzantium and Rus’, the Russkaya Pravda bore no similarity whatever to that of the Byzantine Empire. The absence of capital and corporal punishment rather reflects the Norse way of thought.

    Wikipedia links to this book.

    And, icing on the cake, in Kiev was installed (by Prince Vladimir) state cult of Slavic gods,

    Oops. Before Christianity Vladimir followed the Norse, not Slavic pagan religion. A real |Slav, right? :-)

    Link about Vladimir’s Norse religion is here.

    Read More
    • Replies: @melanf


    Scandinavian mercenaries made up a fifth of the forces of Yaroslav.
     
    Your post proves my point. The core professional soldiers were the 1,000 Scandinavians, the 4,000 Slavic Novgorodians were the assembled militia, carpenters and such.
     
    As can be seen from the text of the chronicle, the « core professional » Vikings played such a minor role that in the description of the battle they not mentioned at all. The war was won by the troops of Novgorod

    You also ignored Yaroslav’s reliance on Scandinavians in his war against Mstislav. Why?
     
    Maybe because Yaroslav’s Scandinavian mercenaries were soundly defeated?

    It was a common feature of Germanic barbaric laws. It wasn’t a Slavic thing.
     
    Similar rules in "Polish truth" (Poland) and the "Statuta Konrádova" (Czech Kingdom)


    And, icing on the cake, in Kiev was installed (by Prince Vladimir) state cult of Slavic gods,
     
    Oops.
    Before Christianity Vladimir followed the Norse, not Slavic pagan religion. A real |Slav, right?
     
    Primary Chronicle:
    « Vladimir then began to reign alone in Kiev, and he set up idols on the hills outside the castle with the hall: one of Perun, made of wood with a head of silver and a mustache of gold, and others of Khors, Dazh'bog, Stribog, Simar'gl, and Mokosh…»

    Perun, Khors, Dazh'bog, Stribog, Simar'gl, and Mokosh - do you really think that is Norse, not Slavic pagan religion? ;)

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  80. @AP

    Scandinavian mercenaries made up a fifth of the forces of Yaroslav.
     
    Your post proves my point. The core professional soldiers were the 1,000 Scandinavians, the 4,000 Slavic Novgorodians were the assembled militia, carpenters and such.

    You also ignored Yaroslav's reliance on Scandinavians in his war against Mstislav. Why?


    Collection of «weregild», jury trials and so on was a common features of the barbaric laws (such as Salic law) reflecting the views of early medieval tribes about justice.
     
    It was a common feature of Germanic barbaric laws. It wasn't a Slavic thing. The Norse were, of course, Germanic. Same with jury trials, another Norse thing. The law was written in Slavic because the population was mostly Slavic but the writer was a Scandinavian and the law that this Scandinavian ruler created followed Norse legal norms.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russkaya_Pravda

    In spite of great influence of Byzantine legislation on the contemporary world, and in spite of great cultural and commercial ties between Byzantium and Rus', the Russkaya Pravda bore no similarity whatever to that of the Byzantine Empire. The absence of capital and corporal punishment rather reflects the Norse way of thought.

    Wikipedia links to this book.


    And, icing on the cake, in Kiev was installed (by Prince Vladimir) state cult of Slavic gods,
     
    Oops. Before Christianity Vladimir followed the Norse, not Slavic pagan religion. A real |Slav, right? :-)

    Link about Vladimir's Norse religion is here.

    Scandinavian mercenaries made up a fifth of the forces of Yaroslav.

    Your post proves my point. The core professional soldiers were the 1,000 Scandinavians, the 4,000 Slavic Novgorodians were the assembled militia, carpenters and such.

    As can be seen from the text of the chronicle, the « core professional » Vikings played such a minor role that in the description of the battle they not mentioned at all. The war was won by the troops of Novgorod

    You also ignored Yaroslav’s reliance on Scandinavians in his war against Mstislav. Why?

    Maybe because Yaroslav’s Scandinavian mercenaries were soundly defeated?

    It was a common feature of Germanic barbaric laws. It wasn’t a Slavic thing.

    Similar rules in “Polish truth” (Poland) and the “Statuta Konrádova” (Czech Kingdom)

    And, icing on the cake, in Kiev was installed (by Prince Vladimir) state cult of Slavic gods,

    Oops.
    Before Christianity Vladimir followed the Norse, not Slavic pagan religion. A real |Slav, right?

    Primary Chronicle:
    « Vladimir then began to reign alone in Kiev, and he set up idols on the hills outside the castle with the hall: one of Perun, made of wood with a head of silver and a mustache of gold, and others of Khors, Dazh’bog, Stribog, Simar’gl, and Mokosh…»

    Perun, Khors, Dazh’bog, Stribog, Simar’gl, and Mokosh – do you really think that is Norse, not Slavic pagan religion? ;)

    Read More
    • Replies: @AP

    "Your post proves my point. The core professional soldiers were the 1,000 Scandinavians, the 4,000 Slavic Novgorodians were the assembled militia, carpenters and such."

    As can be seen from the text of the chronicle, the « core professional » Vikings played such a minor role that in the description of the battle they not mentioned at all. The war was won by the troops of Novgorod
     
    Ironically, the Norse sagas don't mention Novgorodians at all but mention the 1,000 Scandinavians. And they are more detailed about Yaroslav's life than are the Chronicles - so, a better source.

    see: Yaroslav the Wise in Norse Tradition, written by Samuel Hazzard Cross, Speculum, University of Chicago Press.

    A Russian Svidomist will likely believe the story that carpenters were more important in a battle than were seasoned professional soldiers. But objectively, the Scandinavians were the core and the civilian militia were the adjuncts.


    You also ignored Yaroslav’s reliance on Scandinavians in his war against Mstislav. Why?

    Maybe because Yaroslav’s Scandinavian mercenaries were soundly defeated?
     
    Which is irrelevant with respect to our discussion about Yaroslav relying on Scandinavian troops. As we have seen, he relied on Scandinavian troops against Sviatopolk, against Mstislav, and in the 1030s, Harald Sigurdsson (future king ogf Norway) along with Eilifr served as leaders of Yaroslav's military forces. So at every stage, Norsemen played a central role.

    It was a common feature of Germanic barbaric laws. It wasn’t a Slavic thing.

    Similar rules in “Polish truth” (Poland) and the “Statuta Konrádova” (Czech Kingdom)
     
    Both influenced by Germanic customs.

    Oops.
    Before Christianity Vladimir followed the Norse, not Slavic pagan religion. A real |Slav, right?

    Primary Chronicle:
    « Vladimir then began to reign alone in Kiev, and he set up idols on the hills outside the castle with the hall: one of Perun, made of wood with a head of silver and a mustache of gold, and others of Khors, Dazh’bog, Stribog, Simar’gl, and Mokosh…»

    Perun, Khors, Dazh’bog, Stribog, Simar’gl, and Mokosh – do you really think that is Norse, not Slavic pagan religion?
     
    We are discussing Vladimir's religion, not the religion of Kiev. I provided a non-Russian Svidomist source showing that Vladimir followed the Norse Gods. You write about the idols he had built for Kiev's people. Is this how you admit that you were wrong? :-)

    Direct quote from source:

    "Prince Vladmir, who followed the Old Norse religion of his parents"
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  81. AP says:
    @melanf


    Scandinavian mercenaries made up a fifth of the forces of Yaroslav.
     
    Your post proves my point. The core professional soldiers were the 1,000 Scandinavians, the 4,000 Slavic Novgorodians were the assembled militia, carpenters and such.
     
    As can be seen from the text of the chronicle, the « core professional » Vikings played such a minor role that in the description of the battle they not mentioned at all. The war was won by the troops of Novgorod

    You also ignored Yaroslav’s reliance on Scandinavians in his war against Mstislav. Why?
     
    Maybe because Yaroslav’s Scandinavian mercenaries were soundly defeated?

    It was a common feature of Germanic barbaric laws. It wasn’t a Slavic thing.
     
    Similar rules in "Polish truth" (Poland) and the "Statuta Konrádova" (Czech Kingdom)


    And, icing on the cake, in Kiev was installed (by Prince Vladimir) state cult of Slavic gods,
     
    Oops.
    Before Christianity Vladimir followed the Norse, not Slavic pagan religion. A real |Slav, right?
     
    Primary Chronicle:
    « Vladimir then began to reign alone in Kiev, and he set up idols on the hills outside the castle with the hall: one of Perun, made of wood with a head of silver and a mustache of gold, and others of Khors, Dazh'bog, Stribog, Simar'gl, and Mokosh…»

    Perun, Khors, Dazh'bog, Stribog, Simar'gl, and Mokosh - do you really think that is Norse, not Slavic pagan religion? ;)

    “Your post proves my point. The core professional soldiers were the 1,000 Scandinavians, the 4,000 Slavic Novgorodians were the assembled militia, carpenters and such.”

    As can be seen from the text of the chronicle, the « core professional » Vikings played such a minor role that in the description of the battle they not mentioned at all. The war was won by the troops of Novgorod

    Ironically, the Norse sagas don’t mention Novgorodians at all but mention the 1,000 Scandinavians. And they are more detailed about Yaroslav’s life than are the Chronicles – so, a better source.

    see: Yaroslav the Wise in Norse Tradition, written by Samuel Hazzard Cross, Speculum, University of Chicago Press.

    A Russian Svidomist will likely believe the story that carpenters were more important in a battle than were seasoned professional soldiers. But objectively, the Scandinavians were the core and the civilian militia were the adjuncts.

    You also ignored Yaroslav’s reliance on Scandinavians in his war against Mstislav. Why?

    Maybe because Yaroslav’s Scandinavian mercenaries were soundly defeated?

    Which is irrelevant with respect to our discussion about Yaroslav relying on Scandinavian troops. As we have seen, he relied on Scandinavian troops against Sviatopolk, against Mstislav, and in the 1030s, Harald Sigurdsson (future king ogf Norway) along with Eilifr served as leaders of Yaroslav’s military forces. So at every stage, Norsemen played a central role.

    It was a common feature of Germanic barbaric laws. It wasn’t a Slavic thing.

    Similar rules in “Polish truth” (Poland) and the “Statuta Konrádova” (Czech Kingdom)

    Both influenced by Germanic customs.

    Oops.
    Before Christianity Vladimir followed the Norse, not Slavic pagan religion. A real |Slav, right?

    Primary Chronicle:
    « Vladimir then began to reign alone in Kiev, and he set up idols on the hills outside the castle with the hall: one of Perun, made of wood with a head of silver and a mustache of gold, and others of Khors, Dazh’bog, Stribog, Simar’gl, and Mokosh…»

    Perun, Khors, Dazh’bog, Stribog, Simar’gl, and Mokosh – do you really think that is Norse, not Slavic pagan religion?

    We are discussing Vladimir’s religion, not the religion of Kiev. I provided a non-Russian Svidomist source showing that Vladimir followed the Norse Gods. You write about the idols he had built for Kiev’s people. Is this how you admit that you were wrong? :-)

    Direct quote from source:

    “Prince Vladmir, who followed the Old Norse religion of his parents”

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  82. As can be seen from the text of the chronicle, the « core professional » Vikings played such a minor role that in the description of the battle they not mentioned at all. The war was won by the troops of Novgorod

    Ironically, the Norse sagas don’t mention Novgorodians at all but mention the 1,000 Scandinavians. And they are more detailed about Yaroslav’s life than are the Chronicles – so, a better source
    see: Yaroslav the Wise in Norse Tradition, written by Samuel Hazzard Cross, Speculum, University of Chicago Press.

    The authors of these sagas did not even know who was the enemy of Yaroslav: « The
    saga confuses to some extent the names of the contending Russian princes, who are
    referred to as Burizleifr, Jarizleifr, and Varnlaf (Vartilaf). The name Burizleifr applies
    obviously to Svyatopolk…
    » (Yaroslav the Wise in Norse Tradition, written by Samuel Hazzard Cross, Speculum, University of Chicago Press). The wife of Vladimir in the sagas is Olga and so on. «Saga has manifestly unhistorical haracter of much of its narrative» Alas the sagas are not reliable source on the history of «ancient Russia». A reliable source remains the Primary Chronicle, what the article « Yaroslav the Wise in Norse Tradition » says right: «In these accounts, we find confused reminiscences of the actual course of events as outlined by the Russian Chronicle» (Yaroslav the Wise in Norse Tradition, University of Chicago Press)

    A Russian Svidomist will likely believe the story that carpenters were more important in a battle than were seasoned professional soldiers. But objectively, the Scandinavians were the core and the civilian militia were the adjuncts.

    Alas, the “actual course of events as outlined by the Russian Chronicle” (Yaroslav the Wise in Norse Tradition, University of Chicago Press) argues otherwise
    Of course in reality, the Novgorod army was recruited from the nobility. As to the fighting qualities of the «Vikings»: in 1187, the Novgorod Karelians (possibly with the help of Novgorod Slavs) completely looted and destroyed the capital of Sweden

    They sailed into Lake Mälar from the sea,
    whether calm or stormy it might be,
    Once their minds to the idea did turn,
    that they the town of Sigtuna should burn,
    and so thoroughly they put it to the flame,
    that it since then has never been the same.
    There Archbishop Jon was killed,
    a deed that many a heathen thrilled

    Which is irrelevant with respect to our discussion about Yaroslav relying on Scandinavian troops.

    As we know from the “actual course of events as outlined by the Russian Chronicle” ((Yaroslav the Wise in Norse Tradition, University of Chicago Press)), the Vikings badly served Yaroslav – all the time suffered defeats. However if you believe that the use of Scandinavian mercenaries turns Yaroslav in the Scandinavian, his brother Svyatopolk turns out to be a Pecheneg, and another brother, Mstislav – Ossetian. Multicultural family heh heh

    It was a common feature of Germanic barbaric laws. It wasn’t a Slavic thing.

    It was a common feature of any barbaric laws. It was a universal barbaric thing

    Primary Chronicle:
    « Vladimir then began to reign alone in Kiev, and he set up idols on the hills outside the castle with the hall: one of Perun, made of wood with a head of silver and a mustache of gold, and others of Khors, Dazh’bog, Stribog, Simar’gl, and Mokosh…»
    Perun, Khors, Dazh’bog, Stribog, Simar’gl, and Mokosh – do you really think that is Norse, not Slavic pagan religion?

    We are discussing Vladimir’s religion, not the religion of Kiev. I provided a non-Russian Svidomist source showing that Vladimir followed the Norse Gods. You write about the idols he had built for Kiev’s people. Is this how you admit that you were wrong?

    The primary source (Primary Chronicle) claims that Vladimir worshipped the Slavic gods (like his ancestors). Other primary sources on this issue does not exist. Found through Google opinion of madman (devoid of any evidence) is not a source at all.

    Read More
    • Replies: @AP

    A reliable source remains the Primary Chronicle, what the article « Yaroslav the Wise in Norse Tradition » says right: «In these accounts, we find confused reminiscences of the actual course of events as outlined by the Russian Chronicle» (Yaroslav the Wise in Norse Tradition, University of Chicago Press)
     
    A primary source is not necessarily a reliable source. A reliable source is a legitimate objective academic who interprets the primary source...such as the author of the Yaroslav the Wise in Norse Tradition, Samuel Hazzard Cross.

    What does he conclude at the end of his article (page 197)?

    "The importance of these Icelandic references to the age of Yaroslav lies rather in retrospect. They show that among the descendants of Rurik there existed a continuity of tradition associating them with the leading families of Scandinavia. The capacity of the outstanding princes of Kiev was, in fact, a product of Scandinavian energy than of Slavic inertia. The restricted character of Scandinavian influence on early Russian civilization is explicable on one hand by the proximity of Kiev to the superior culture of Byzantium and on the other hand by the peculiar absorbent power that Russia has always had on the immigrant. Furthermore, in view of even this evidence as to the intimate relationships between the Russian princes and their Scandinavian contemporaries, there can be little question but that the ultimate Scandinavian origin of the Russian princely house was clearly recognized by its members.


    . As to the fighting qualities of the «Vikings»: in 1187, the Novgorod Karelians (possibly with the help of Novgorod Slavs)
     
    This apparent sneak attack took place 100 years later. Please stay on topic.

    As we know from the “actual course of events as outlined by the Russian Chronicle” ((Yaroslav the Wise in Norse Tradition, University of Chicago Press)), the Vikings badly served Yaroslav – all the time suffered defeats.
     
    Again, the point is not his rate of success but that he relied on them.

    However if you believe that the use of Scandinavian mercenaries turns Yaroslav in the Scandinavian, his brother Svyatopolk turns out to be a Pecheneg, and another brother, Mstislav – Ossetian.
     
    It is merely one part of the overall picture. If Sviatopolk was himself 100% (or perhaps 75%) of Pecheneg ancestry and and he married a Pecheneg princess and he relied on Pecheneg troops and his court was a place of exile and training for Pechenegs then yes, he would be a Pecheneg. But this of course was not the case.

    In contrast, Yarslav was of 100% Scandinavian ancestry (slight chance - 75%), and he relied on Scandinavian troops, and he married a Scandinavian princess, and his court was a place for Scandinavians to spend time in while they were exiled, etc. All together this adds up to a very clear picture, that only a true Russian svidomite, blinded by his Russian svidomism, cannot see.


    It [weregild] was a common feature of Germanic barbaric laws. It wasn’t a Slavic thing.

    It was a common feature of any barbaric laws. It was a universal barbaric thing
     

    Nope. From Britannica:

    Wergild, also spelled Wergeld, or Weregild, (Old English: “man payment”), in ancient Germanic law, the amount of compensation paid by a person committing an offense to the injured party or, in case of death, to his family.

    For a summary of the obvious similarities between Russka Pravda and Germanic Scandinavian laws read this link to the book Law in Medieval Russia. Scroll to page 53, the section "Germanic Contacts."

    In summary: Russka Pravda fits effortlessly into the category of other Germanic legal codes from that time. It's closest to Lex Saxonum, from a region that bordered Jutland. In fact, the expert concludes " the first impression received upon acquainting oneself with an RP text is that it is not unlike the text of the early medieval Germanic laws."

    Your Russian svidomism is strong indeed for you deny the basic Germanic nature of the Russka Pravda.

    So - 100% Scandinavian descent (slight chance, only 75%) prince, surrounding himself and dependent on Scandinavian warriors, married to Scandinavian princess, has a court that is a place of exile for various Scandinavians, and created a legal code that is typically Germanic in content - is a Slav. Very funny. :-)


    "We are discussing Vladimir’s religion, not the religion of Kiev. I provided a non-Russian Svidomist source showing that Vladimir followed the Norse Gods. You write about the idols he had built for Kiev’s people. Is this how you admit that you were wrong?"

    The primary source (Primary Chronicle) claims that Vladimir worshipped the Slavic gods (like his ancestors). Other primary sources on this issue does not exist. Found through Google opinion of madman (devoid of any evidence) is not a source at all.

     

    "Opinion of madman?"

    The source, that I linked to, is Semantics of Statebuilding: Language, Meanings and Sovereignty, by Nicolas Lemay-Hébert, Nicholas Onuf, Vojin Rakić, Petar Bojanić

    Authors of the source are all legitimate academics.

    Let me remind you what was in their book: "“Prince Vladmir, who followed the Old Norse religion of his parents.”

    This statement also appears in Russia's Identity in International Relations: Images, Perceptions, Misperceptions, edited by Ray Taras.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  83. AP says:
    @melanf


    As can be seen from the text of the chronicle, the « core professional » Vikings played such a minor role that in the description of the battle they not mentioned at all. The war was won by the troops of Novgorod
     
    Ironically, the Norse sagas don’t mention Novgorodians at all but mention the 1,000 Scandinavians. And they are more detailed about Yaroslav’s life than are the Chronicles – so, a better source
    see: Yaroslav the Wise in Norse Tradition, written by Samuel Hazzard Cross, Speculum, University of Chicago Press.

     

    The authors of these sagas did not even know who was the enemy of Yaroslav: « The
    saga confuses to some extent the names of the contending Russian princes, who are
    referred to as Burizleifr, Jarizleifr, and Varnlaf (Vartilaf). The name Burizleifr applies
    obviously to Svyatopolk…
    » (Yaroslav the Wise in Norse Tradition, written by Samuel Hazzard Cross, Speculum, University of Chicago Press). The wife of Vladimir in the sagas is Olga and so on. «Saga has manifestly unhistorical haracter of much of its narrative» Alas the sagas are not reliable source on the history of «ancient Russia». A reliable source remains the Primary Chronicle, what the article « Yaroslav the Wise in Norse Tradition » says right: «In these accounts, we find confused reminiscences of the actual course of events as outlined by the Russian Chronicle» (Yaroslav the Wise in Norse Tradition, University of Chicago Press)

    A Russian Svidomist will likely believe the story that carpenters were more important in a battle than were seasoned professional soldiers. But objectively, the Scandinavians were the core and the civilian militia were the adjuncts.
     
    Alas, the "actual course of events as outlined by the Russian Chronicle" (Yaroslav the Wise in Norse Tradition, University of Chicago Press) argues otherwise
    Of course in reality, the Novgorod army was recruited from the nobility. As to the fighting qualities of the «Vikings»: in 1187, the Novgorod Karelians (possibly with the help of Novgorod Slavs) completely looted and destroyed the capital of Sweden

    They sailed into Lake Mälar from the sea,
    whether calm or stormy it might be,
    Once their minds to the idea did turn,
    that they the town of Sigtuna should burn,
    and so thoroughly they put it to the flame,
    that it since then has never been the same.
    There Archbishop Jon was killed,
    a deed that many a heathen thrilled


    Which is irrelevant with respect to our discussion about Yaroslav relying on Scandinavian troops.
     
    As we know from the "actual course of events as outlined by the Russian Chronicle" ((Yaroslav the Wise in Norse Tradition, University of Chicago Press)), the Vikings badly served Yaroslav - all the time suffered defeats. However if you believe that the use of Scandinavian mercenaries turns Yaroslav in the Scandinavian, his brother Svyatopolk turns out to be a Pecheneg, and another brother, Mstislav - Ossetian. Multicultural family heh heh

    It was a common feature of Germanic barbaric laws. It wasn’t a Slavic thing.
     
    It was a common feature of any barbaric laws. It was a universal barbaric thing


    Primary Chronicle:
    « Vladimir then began to reign alone in Kiev, and he set up idols on the hills outside the castle with the hall: one of Perun, made of wood with a head of silver and a mustache of gold, and others of Khors, Dazh’bog, Stribog, Simar’gl, and Mokosh…»
    Perun, Khors, Dazh’bog, Stribog, Simar’gl, and Mokosh – do you really think that is Norse, not Slavic pagan religion?
     
    We are discussing Vladimir’s religion, not the religion of Kiev. I provided a non-Russian Svidomist source showing that Vladimir followed the Norse Gods. You write about the idols he had built for Kiev’s people. Is this how you admit that you were wrong?
     
    The primary source (Primary Chronicle) claims that Vladimir worshipped the Slavic gods (like his ancestors). Other primary sources on this issue does not exist. Found through Google opinion of madman (devoid of any evidence) is not a source at all.

    A reliable source remains the Primary Chronicle, what the article « Yaroslav the Wise in Norse Tradition » says right: «In these accounts, we find confused reminiscences of the actual course of events as outlined by the Russian Chronicle» (Yaroslav the Wise in Norse Tradition, University of Chicago Press)

    A primary source is not necessarily a reliable source. A reliable source is a legitimate objective academic who interprets the primary source…such as the author of the Yaroslav the Wise in Norse Tradition, Samuel Hazzard Cross.

    What does he conclude at the end of his article (page 197)?

    “The importance of these Icelandic references to the age of Yaroslav lies rather in retrospect. They show that among the descendants of Rurik there existed a continuity of tradition associating them with the leading families of Scandinavia. The capacity of the outstanding princes of Kiev was, in fact, a product of Scandinavian energy than of Slavic inertia. The restricted character of Scandinavian influence on early Russian civilization is explicable on one hand by the proximity of Kiev to the superior culture of Byzantium and on the other hand by the peculiar absorbent power that Russia has always had on the immigrant. Furthermore, in view of even this evidence as to the intimate relationships between the Russian princes and their Scandinavian contemporaries, there can be little question but that the ultimate Scandinavian origin of the Russian princely house was clearly recognized by its members.

    . As to the fighting qualities of the «Vikings»: in 1187, the Novgorod Karelians (possibly with the help of Novgorod Slavs)

    This apparent sneak attack took place 100 years later. Please stay on topic.

    As we know from the “actual course of events as outlined by the Russian Chronicle” ((Yaroslav the Wise in Norse Tradition, University of Chicago Press)), the Vikings badly served Yaroslav – all the time suffered defeats.

    Again, the point is not his rate of success but that he relied on them.

    However if you believe that the use of Scandinavian mercenaries turns Yaroslav in the Scandinavian, his brother Svyatopolk turns out to be a Pecheneg, and another brother, Mstislav – Ossetian.

    It is merely one part of the overall picture. If Sviatopolk was himself 100% (or perhaps 75%) of Pecheneg ancestry and and he married a Pecheneg princess and he relied on Pecheneg troops and his court was a place of exile and training for Pechenegs then yes, he would be a Pecheneg. But this of course was not the case.

    In contrast, Yarslav was of 100% Scandinavian ancestry (slight chance – 75%), and he relied on Scandinavian troops, and he married a Scandinavian princess, and his court was a place for Scandinavians to spend time in while they were exiled, etc. All together this adds up to a very clear picture, that only a true Russian svidomite, blinded by his Russian svidomism, cannot see.

    It [weregild] was a common feature of Germanic barbaric laws. It wasn’t a Slavic thing.

    It was a common feature of any barbaric laws. It was a universal barbaric thing

    Nope. From Britannica:

    Wergild, also spelled Wergeld, or Weregild, (Old English: “man payment”), in ancient Germanic law, the amount of compensation paid by a person committing an offense to the injured party or, in case of death, to his family.

    For a summary of the obvious similarities between Russka Pravda and Germanic Scandinavian laws read this link to the book Law in Medieval Russia. Scroll to page 53, the section “Germanic Contacts.”

    In summary: Russka Pravda fits effortlessly into the category of other Germanic legal codes from that time. It’s closest to Lex Saxonum, from a region that bordered Jutland. In fact, the expert concludes ” the first impression received upon acquainting oneself with an RP text is that it is not unlike the text of the early medieval Germanic laws.”

    Your Russian svidomism is strong indeed for you deny the basic Germanic nature of the Russka Pravda.

    So – 100% Scandinavian descent (slight chance, only 75%) prince, surrounding himself and dependent on Scandinavian warriors, married to Scandinavian princess, has a court that is a place of exile for various Scandinavians, and created a legal code that is typically Germanic in content – is a Slav. Very funny. :-)

    “We are discussing Vladimir’s religion, not the religion of Kiev. I provided a non-Russian Svidomist source showing that Vladimir followed the Norse Gods. You write about the idols he had built for Kiev’s people. Is this how you admit that you were wrong?”

    The primary source (Primary Chronicle) claims that Vladimir worshipped the Slavic gods (like his ancestors). Other primary sources on this issue does not exist. Found through Google opinion of madman (devoid of any evidence) is not a source at all.

    “Opinion of madman?”

    The source, that I linked to, is Semantics of Statebuilding: Language, Meanings and Sovereignty, by Nicolas Lemay-Hébert, Nicholas Onuf, Vojin Rakić, Petar Bojanić

    Authors of the source are all legitimate academics.

    Let me remind you what was in their book: ““Prince Vladmir, who followed the Old Norse religion of his parents.”

    This statement also appears in Russia’s Identity in International Relations: Images, Perceptions, Misperceptions, edited by Ray Taras.

    Read More
    • Replies: @melanf

    Authors of the source are all legitimate academics blah-blah-blah
     
    "by the middle of the 10th century the Rus had assimilated with the native Slavs and lost their distinct identity.... Even by 907, the Rus appear to have adopted native religious beliefs, swearing to uphold the treaties by the Slavic gods Perun, a thunder god, and Veles, a chthonic deity etc. etc"

    Northmen. The viking saga 793–1241 ad. John Haywood


    Read through Google ( I'm too lazy to drag down the whole text here) . Self-education is always useful
    , @melanf

    For a summary of the obvious similarities between Russka Pravda and Germanic Scandinavian laws read this link to the book Law in Medieval Russia. Scroll to page 53, the section “Germanic Contacts.”
     
    Dear friend! It's sad that you have not read this section until the end. Otherwise you'd see the conclusion:

    "The earliest law of other Slavic peoples, where there is no reason for assuming any significant Germanic influence, appears to be quite similar to Old-Russian law"

    (book "Law in Medieval Russia" Ferdinand Joseph Maria Feldbrugge, section “Germanic Contacts”, p 56)
    Also from the same the section:

    "Also, the Viking element, although very visible, must have been The earliest law of other Slavic peoples, where there is no reason for assuming any significant Germanic influence, appears to be quite similar to Old-Russian lawsmall in quantitative terms and was quickly absorbed into the Russian population and Russian culture."

    "The Russian signatories of the 945 treaty, although clearly Vikings, judging by their names, did not swear by Thor, but by Perun the Slavic god of thunder, indicating that the Varangian retinue of the Kievan prince had already adopted the religion of their Slavic surroundings"

    and so on.

    As you can see science in the West, too, is dominated by "Russian svidomism". But I'm sure you will soon overtake traditional science and rigid adherents of this science, thanks to your revolutionary negationist theories.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  84. @AP

    A reliable source remains the Primary Chronicle, what the article « Yaroslav the Wise in Norse Tradition » says right: «In these accounts, we find confused reminiscences of the actual course of events as outlined by the Russian Chronicle» (Yaroslav the Wise in Norse Tradition, University of Chicago Press)
     
    A primary source is not necessarily a reliable source. A reliable source is a legitimate objective academic who interprets the primary source...such as the author of the Yaroslav the Wise in Norse Tradition, Samuel Hazzard Cross.

    What does he conclude at the end of his article (page 197)?

    "The importance of these Icelandic references to the age of Yaroslav lies rather in retrospect. They show that among the descendants of Rurik there existed a continuity of tradition associating them with the leading families of Scandinavia. The capacity of the outstanding princes of Kiev was, in fact, a product of Scandinavian energy than of Slavic inertia. The restricted character of Scandinavian influence on early Russian civilization is explicable on one hand by the proximity of Kiev to the superior culture of Byzantium and on the other hand by the peculiar absorbent power that Russia has always had on the immigrant. Furthermore, in view of even this evidence as to the intimate relationships between the Russian princes and their Scandinavian contemporaries, there can be little question but that the ultimate Scandinavian origin of the Russian princely house was clearly recognized by its members.


    . As to the fighting qualities of the «Vikings»: in 1187, the Novgorod Karelians (possibly with the help of Novgorod Slavs)
     
    This apparent sneak attack took place 100 years later. Please stay on topic.

    As we know from the “actual course of events as outlined by the Russian Chronicle” ((Yaroslav the Wise in Norse Tradition, University of Chicago Press)), the Vikings badly served Yaroslav – all the time suffered defeats.
     
    Again, the point is not his rate of success but that he relied on them.

    However if you believe that the use of Scandinavian mercenaries turns Yaroslav in the Scandinavian, his brother Svyatopolk turns out to be a Pecheneg, and another brother, Mstislav – Ossetian.
     
    It is merely one part of the overall picture. If Sviatopolk was himself 100% (or perhaps 75%) of Pecheneg ancestry and and he married a Pecheneg princess and he relied on Pecheneg troops and his court was a place of exile and training for Pechenegs then yes, he would be a Pecheneg. But this of course was not the case.

    In contrast, Yarslav was of 100% Scandinavian ancestry (slight chance - 75%), and he relied on Scandinavian troops, and he married a Scandinavian princess, and his court was a place for Scandinavians to spend time in while they were exiled, etc. All together this adds up to a very clear picture, that only a true Russian svidomite, blinded by his Russian svidomism, cannot see.


    It [weregild] was a common feature of Germanic barbaric laws. It wasn’t a Slavic thing.

    It was a common feature of any barbaric laws. It was a universal barbaric thing
     

    Nope. From Britannica:

    Wergild, also spelled Wergeld, or Weregild, (Old English: “man payment”), in ancient Germanic law, the amount of compensation paid by a person committing an offense to the injured party or, in case of death, to his family.

    For a summary of the obvious similarities between Russka Pravda and Germanic Scandinavian laws read this link to the book Law in Medieval Russia. Scroll to page 53, the section "Germanic Contacts."

    In summary: Russka Pravda fits effortlessly into the category of other Germanic legal codes from that time. It's closest to Lex Saxonum, from a region that bordered Jutland. In fact, the expert concludes " the first impression received upon acquainting oneself with an RP text is that it is not unlike the text of the early medieval Germanic laws."

    Your Russian svidomism is strong indeed for you deny the basic Germanic nature of the Russka Pravda.

    So - 100% Scandinavian descent (slight chance, only 75%) prince, surrounding himself and dependent on Scandinavian warriors, married to Scandinavian princess, has a court that is a place of exile for various Scandinavians, and created a legal code that is typically Germanic in content - is a Slav. Very funny. :-)


    "We are discussing Vladimir’s religion, not the religion of Kiev. I provided a non-Russian Svidomist source showing that Vladimir followed the Norse Gods. You write about the idols he had built for Kiev’s people. Is this how you admit that you were wrong?"

    The primary source (Primary Chronicle) claims that Vladimir worshipped the Slavic gods (like his ancestors). Other primary sources on this issue does not exist. Found through Google opinion of madman (devoid of any evidence) is not a source at all.

     

    "Opinion of madman?"

    The source, that I linked to, is Semantics of Statebuilding: Language, Meanings and Sovereignty, by Nicolas Lemay-Hébert, Nicholas Onuf, Vojin Rakić, Petar Bojanić

    Authors of the source are all legitimate academics.

    Let me remind you what was in their book: "“Prince Vladmir, who followed the Old Norse religion of his parents.”

    This statement also appears in Russia's Identity in International Relations: Images, Perceptions, Misperceptions, edited by Ray Taras.

    Authors of the source are all legitimate academics blah-blah-blah

    by the middle of the 10th century the Rus had assimilated with the native Slavs and lost their distinct identity…. Even by 907, the Rus appear to have adopted native religious beliefs, swearing to uphold the treaties by the Slavic gods Perun, a thunder god, and Veles, a chthonic deity etc. etc”

    Northmen. The viking saga 793–1241 ad. John Haywood

    Read through Google ( I’m too lazy to drag down the whole text here) . Self-education is always useful

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  85. @AP

    A reliable source remains the Primary Chronicle, what the article « Yaroslav the Wise in Norse Tradition » says right: «In these accounts, we find confused reminiscences of the actual course of events as outlined by the Russian Chronicle» (Yaroslav the Wise in Norse Tradition, University of Chicago Press)
     
    A primary source is not necessarily a reliable source. A reliable source is a legitimate objective academic who interprets the primary source...such as the author of the Yaroslav the Wise in Norse Tradition, Samuel Hazzard Cross.

    What does he conclude at the end of his article (page 197)?

    "The importance of these Icelandic references to the age of Yaroslav lies rather in retrospect. They show that among the descendants of Rurik there existed a continuity of tradition associating them with the leading families of Scandinavia. The capacity of the outstanding princes of Kiev was, in fact, a product of Scandinavian energy than of Slavic inertia. The restricted character of Scandinavian influence on early Russian civilization is explicable on one hand by the proximity of Kiev to the superior culture of Byzantium and on the other hand by the peculiar absorbent power that Russia has always had on the immigrant. Furthermore, in view of even this evidence as to the intimate relationships between the Russian princes and their Scandinavian contemporaries, there can be little question but that the ultimate Scandinavian origin of the Russian princely house was clearly recognized by its members.


    . As to the fighting qualities of the «Vikings»: in 1187, the Novgorod Karelians (possibly with the help of Novgorod Slavs)
     
    This apparent sneak attack took place 100 years later. Please stay on topic.

    As we know from the “actual course of events as outlined by the Russian Chronicle” ((Yaroslav the Wise in Norse Tradition, University of Chicago Press)), the Vikings badly served Yaroslav – all the time suffered defeats.
     
    Again, the point is not his rate of success but that he relied on them.

    However if you believe that the use of Scandinavian mercenaries turns Yaroslav in the Scandinavian, his brother Svyatopolk turns out to be a Pecheneg, and another brother, Mstislav – Ossetian.
     
    It is merely one part of the overall picture. If Sviatopolk was himself 100% (or perhaps 75%) of Pecheneg ancestry and and he married a Pecheneg princess and he relied on Pecheneg troops and his court was a place of exile and training for Pechenegs then yes, he would be a Pecheneg. But this of course was not the case.

    In contrast, Yarslav was of 100% Scandinavian ancestry (slight chance - 75%), and he relied on Scandinavian troops, and he married a Scandinavian princess, and his court was a place for Scandinavians to spend time in while they were exiled, etc. All together this adds up to a very clear picture, that only a true Russian svidomite, blinded by his Russian svidomism, cannot see.


    It [weregild] was a common feature of Germanic barbaric laws. It wasn’t a Slavic thing.

    It was a common feature of any barbaric laws. It was a universal barbaric thing
     

    Nope. From Britannica:

    Wergild, also spelled Wergeld, or Weregild, (Old English: “man payment”), in ancient Germanic law, the amount of compensation paid by a person committing an offense to the injured party or, in case of death, to his family.

    For a summary of the obvious similarities between Russka Pravda and Germanic Scandinavian laws read this link to the book Law in Medieval Russia. Scroll to page 53, the section "Germanic Contacts."

    In summary: Russka Pravda fits effortlessly into the category of other Germanic legal codes from that time. It's closest to Lex Saxonum, from a region that bordered Jutland. In fact, the expert concludes " the first impression received upon acquainting oneself with an RP text is that it is not unlike the text of the early medieval Germanic laws."

    Your Russian svidomism is strong indeed for you deny the basic Germanic nature of the Russka Pravda.

    So - 100% Scandinavian descent (slight chance, only 75%) prince, surrounding himself and dependent on Scandinavian warriors, married to Scandinavian princess, has a court that is a place of exile for various Scandinavians, and created a legal code that is typically Germanic in content - is a Slav. Very funny. :-)


    "We are discussing Vladimir’s religion, not the religion of Kiev. I provided a non-Russian Svidomist source showing that Vladimir followed the Norse Gods. You write about the idols he had built for Kiev’s people. Is this how you admit that you were wrong?"

    The primary source (Primary Chronicle) claims that Vladimir worshipped the Slavic gods (like his ancestors). Other primary sources on this issue does not exist. Found through Google opinion of madman (devoid of any evidence) is not a source at all.

     

    "Opinion of madman?"

    The source, that I linked to, is Semantics of Statebuilding: Language, Meanings and Sovereignty, by Nicolas Lemay-Hébert, Nicholas Onuf, Vojin Rakić, Petar Bojanić

    Authors of the source are all legitimate academics.

    Let me remind you what was in their book: "“Prince Vladmir, who followed the Old Norse religion of his parents.”

    This statement also appears in Russia's Identity in International Relations: Images, Perceptions, Misperceptions, edited by Ray Taras.

    For a summary of the obvious similarities between Russka Pravda and Germanic Scandinavian laws read this link to the book Law in Medieval Russia. Scroll to page 53, the section “Germanic Contacts.”

    Dear friend! It’s sad that you have not read this section until the end. Otherwise you’d see the conclusion:

    The earliest law of other Slavic peoples, where there is no reason for assuming any significant Germanic influence, appears to be quite similar to Old-Russian law

    (book “Law in Medieval Russia” Ferdinand Joseph Maria Feldbrugge, section “Germanic Contacts”, p 56)
    Also from the same the section:

    Also, the Viking element, although very visible, must have been The earliest law of other Slavic peoples, where there is no reason for assuming any significant Germanic influence, appears to be quite similar to Old-Russian lawsmall in quantitative terms and was quickly absorbed into the Russian population and Russian culture.”

    The Russian signatories of the 945 treaty, although clearly Vikings, judging by their names, did not swear by Thor, but by Perun the Slavic god of thunder, indicating that the Varangian retinue of the Kievan prince had already adopted the religion of their Slavic surroundings

    and so on.

    As you can see science in the West, too, is dominated by “Russian svidomism”. But I’m sure you will soon overtake traditional science and rigid adherents of this science, thanks to your revolutionary negationist theories.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments

Comments are closed.

Subscribe to All Anatoly Karlin Comments via RSS