#kyivan rus'

[tomorrowusa]

East Slavic (as opposed to West or South Slavic) culture had its roots in what is now Ukraine.

In the 11th century Kyiv was thriving at a time when what is now the Kremlin was just a place where traders on their way to Novgorod would stop to pee.

Russia even sort of stole the name of the country from Kyivan Rus'.

How Moscow hijacked the history of Ukraine-Rus’

At best, Russia is a former colonial power seeking to re-impose itself on its lost colonies.

Imagine the outrage if Britain tried to take back Nigeria or Kenya. It is hypocritical to be anti-colonialism in Africa and not be anti-colonialism in Europe.

Russia needs to go home and stay home. The only thing to negotiate is how many days it would take Russia to leave Ukraine.

[memories-of-ancients]

Gold temple pendant with two birds, Kyivan Rus, 12th century

from The Walters Art Museum

[unhonestlymirror]

The sword of the blacksmith Liudota is an archaeological monument of the princely era of Kyivan Rus, a decorated sword with an inscription "коваль Людота". The sword dates back to the first half of the 11th century. The sword was found in 1890 during farm work in the village of Khvoshchove, near the city of Myrhorod, Poltava region.

N.B. In the russian language, the blacksmith is "кузнец". In Belaruthian, it's "каваль".

P.S. The moral of the story is to place watermarks on your art. XD

[alcestas-sloboda]

I'm seriously going mental over this Rus' and Russia distinction. The precise reason Peter the Great changed the name from Moscovy to the Russian Empire was to establish a direct connection to the rich history of Kyivan Rus' and assert the claim as the sole true descendant of the Rurik dynasty. His thought process went like this: to build a formidable empire, a strong historical foundation is needed. Moscow's ties to the Mongols were not as significant as the history of the Kyivan state, which prior to the Mongol invasion of 1240 was one of the most advanced in Europe and had numerous representatives in various ruling dynasties. Credit must be given; he succeeded in doing so. Even centuries later, I find myself reading, listening, and observing his actions in effect as Russians and Europeans, blindly following the centuries long lies, erase my country's and my people's history.

[ohsalome]

Although it is pointless to play on the russian ground of "who is a rightful inheritors of the crown of Kyivan Rus'" because we live in the fucking 21st century and the rules of monarchical inheritance are irrelevant in the modern nation-making, there are still interesting historical parallels to make.

When the founder of Moscow, prince Yuri Dolgoruky first conquered Kyiv, he was initially kicked out by the local elite (and, eventually, was assassinated by them), because Kyivan tradition always assumed involvement of locals in self-governance. On the contrast, the Suzdal' kingdom from which Yuri came, had an autocratic tradition even back then, which Yuri unsuccessfully tried to establish in his newly acquired lands, because of which the local aristocracy, which expected its opinion to be respected, revolved.

And to this day, we see the difference between the political psychology of our two countries. Ukraine still is divided by "local princes" - oligarchs in modern iteration - who accumulate the capital and use the acquired power to push their interests on the governmental level; and in russia the Duma is nothing but a bunch of their despot's yes-men who pantomime an illusion of democracy noone finds believable anymore.

Why of course, yes, Ukraine, and Russia, and Belarus culturally come from the same roots - just like partially Lithuania and Poland - but it would be disingenuous to view Rus' as one monolith that created a "Slavic nation". Ukraine clearly draws more heritage from the Kyivan branch, because duh - Kyiv is still here, I can personally vouch for that. And muscovy's tradition takes root in Novgorod and Suzdal kingdoms, which, while being politically of the same branch, had their own distinguishing features that set them apart, for example, the influence of the Golden Horde, which we do not have.

Medieval Eastern European is so complex, and to simplify it in order to push a certain political agenda of a certain nation with imperialistic ambitions... Idk. The more I learn, the more it doesn't fit, and the more I see the puppeteers' hand behind the scene. I don't understand why other people don't.

[ukraineblr]

Kyivan Rus Park (Kopachiv, Kyiv Oblast) 🍂

[mlishchinska]

Історичний одяг українки / Historical costumes of a Ukrainian woman

3 B.C - 18 century

Нью-Йорк / New York, 1966

[vintage-ukraine]

Lamenting Yaroslvana by Volodymyr Favorsky, 1950

[propalahramota]

Hello, mutuals, my kith and kin, time for a super specific historical beef!

I know, it's been a while.

I stumbled on the post below in the Ukraine tag and I was very surprised by it. Usually when I go to that tag, I'm annoyed by pro-russian bigots and tankies, but this time I was annoyed by a stupid Normanist take! Fun!

This blog, which gives me bad vibes so I used a screenshot instead of reblogging, claims that the Kingdom of Kyiv is a 100 percent Viking-made, and those dirty Slavs had no ability to govern themselves.

I say: Bullshit!

And let me make it very clear that I don't agree on anything with putin. He is a psycho and war criminal who uses his own pseudohistorical delusions to justify his imperialist conquest. Both him and the author of this post are wrong.

Let me tell you why:

Our main source on the early Kyivan Rus is The Primary Chronicle by Nestor, also known as The Tale of Bygone Years. It's not a contemporary source. Nestor wrote decades after the most recent of the events he's describing, using the stories he had heard himself as well as earlier Byzantine chronicles. Thus, as you can imagine, it's not super accurate in places, and sometimes the author leaves pretty big gaps in the narrative that historians have worked to fill in.

For example, King Igor (aka Ingvarr) came to rule Kyiv after the death of his predecessor Oleg the Clairvoyant (aka Helgi), who himself had come to rule Kyiv after two guys called Askold and Dir. Nestor calls Igor Rurik's son but timeline-wise the math isn't mathing, so it's much more likely that he was Oleg's son, or nephew, or something like that. Igor marries Olga (aka also Helgi).

And then something really weird happens.

Ingvarr and Helgi have a son with a super unusual for a Viking aristocrat name - Svyatoslav.

And then Svyatoslav has three sons named Oleg (one more Helgi), Yaropolk, and Vladymir.

Vladymir ends up taking the throne and, being a massive manwhore, has a bunch of kids - most of them have Slavic names and some have Greek names. Vladymir is succeeded by Yaroslav the Wise.

It may not seem like a big deal but the King of Kyiv and his wife, who were both Viking nobility, suddenly decided to name their heir and only child a Slavic name. And after him, the old traditional Northern names completely go out of use in the dynasty.

Which means that somewhere in the early Xth century, which is not at all long after the establishment of the Rurikid dynasty in Kyiv (mid IXth century), there was a monumental shift in the Kyivan court politics that urged the foreigners on the throne to make a public effort to assimilate with the local population. We don't know what happened. Nestor never told us because he either didn't know himself or didn't think it was worth mentioning, but this monumental shift is right there, between the lines.

And you are going to tell me that the local Kyiv elites had no say in the government? That Rus Statehood was completely imported and foreign? That the Kingdom of Kyiv was invented by the Scandinavian conquerors?

I say: read the fucking sources, twats!

[thorsvinur]

Two of my living history kits, or two versions of one kit, finally coming together. This is my high status kit focusing on Kievan Rus in the later 10th to early 11th century. The territory of Kievan Rus encompassed the areas of modern day Ukraine, Belarus and western Russia; and the society was culturally a mix of Slavic and eastern Scandinavian peoples with notable Byzantine influences on the upper social strata.

(The fourth photo featuring my impression of one of the carved faces on the Oseberg cart) 😅

[tomorrowusa]

The "interview" was more like a Ted Cruz filibuster – but even less factual.

Putin ranted quite a bit about his self-serving, imperialistic view of Ukrainian history. Russian ethno-nationalists want their Western dupes to think that Ukraine is some sort of offshoot of Russia. The truth is closer to the opposite of that.

What is now Ukraine had a thriving culture for centuries when Moscow was still just a shit hole on the banks of a tributary of a tributary of the Volga River.

Russia even stole its name from Ukraine.

Stealing History: How Moscovia (Muscovy) is stealing Ukrainian history

Putin used Tucker Carlson to push propaganda as if Tucker were an employee of Russian state TV.

Putin would never grant an interview to a legit Western journalist. That tells us something about Tucker Carlson.

BONUS TRACK...

Tucker Carlson interview: Fact-checking Putin's 'nonsense' history

[ancientorigins]

Working on a tip off from his grandmother, an explorer/conservationist in Kyiv has uncovered a lost cave system and within it has found ancient writing and symbols dating back over a thousand years.

[unhonestlymirror]

Putin told his version of the history of the GDL and said that Zelensky's father fought against fascism, although he was born after the war

In an interview with American journalist Tucker Carlson, russian president Vladimir Putin said that he considers the Grand Duchy of Lithuania to be a russian state, as "russians made up a significant part of this state." According to him, after the unification of the Grand Duchy and the Kingdom of Poland, the Poles began to annex the lands of modern Ukraine.

.

Laughing my ass off. Grand Duchy of Lithuania consisted mostly of Lithuanians. Lithuanians back then were: Lietuviai, Lićviny, Samogitians, and Ruthenians (people of Kyivan Rus'). Well, and a bit of Tatars. Lietuviai are modern Lithuanians, Lićviny are modern Belaruthians, Ruthenians (rusy) are modern Ukrainians. And Ruthenians made about 1/3 of GDL, not "most of them". There were no russians in Grand Duchy of Lithuania because russians were called muscovites back then, who eventually occupied Belaruthian Smalensk. Vytautas tried to make a friend out of moscow Duchy, but since russia has always been sick in the head, he didn't succeed, sadly.

And GDL wasn't also called "Lithuanian-russian". It was called "Lithuanian-Ruthenian-Samogitian" because Ukrainians are pretty independent.

[theophan-o]

St Michael's Golden-Domed Monastery in Kyiv (Михайлівський золотоверхий монастир) on the old Ukrainian postcard, which I bought during one from my stays in Kyiv.

[herukapadmajungiansworld]

KYIV WAS FOUNDED IN 482

[ukraineblr]

Kyivan Rus' Park