#learn history | Explore Tumblr Posts and Blogs

unhonestlymirror · 8 months

Text

...

I am begging you, please stop using Himaruya's creation as "canon". We have history for this.

The reason why Ukrainians and Belaruthians usually don't say anything is because we are really damn tired of explaining the most obvious to us things over and over. Unfortunately, if we don't do that, there will be more and more people who genuinely believe in things like on this screen.

"Muscovy, on the other hand, grew out of the share of Yuri Dolgorukiy - "Suzdal Valley", or the Volodymyr-Suzdal Principality , located in the basin of the Oka River , the upper reaches of the Volga and its tributaries - Sheksna and Kostroma . The main cities of the Suzdal Forest were Suzdal , Rostov , and Vladimir . The earliest inhabitants of this region were the Finno-Ugric tribes, some of which were later conquered by the boyars of Dolgorukiy Long-armed"

"The ancient history of the Scandinavians often mentions two Finnish countries, free and independent: Kyrialandia, which stretched from the Gulf of Finland to the White Sea and included modern M. Karamzin Olonetska and part of the Arkhangelsk province, and Biarmia, which covered the space from the Northern Dvina and the White Sea to the Pechora River".

"That Moscow is a Finnish word and that the future capital of Great Russia was, using colonization terms, a “fortified trading post” in the Finnish country, everyone knows this, as well as the fact that the surroundings of Moscow were extremely densely populated even in prehistoric times, so depict the emergence of this city how the settlement by "cultural Slavs" of a completely wild place is possible only by ignoring everyone, again, well-known archaeological data. - Pokrovskiy M.N. "The emergence of the Muscovite state and the "Great Russian nationality"— historical science and class struggle. Historiographic essays, critical articles, and notes." Edition 1. [archived on 11 December 2019 at the wayback machine]/ Pokrovsky M. N.— M.—L.: Sotsekgiz, 1933— P. 267—284.

It's a russian source that they most likely used for exusing the attempt to occupy Finland in 1939-1940 . Finland has nothing to do with russia.

"Ukrainian historian N. D. Polonska-Vasylenko claimed that "In the territory remote from the centre of the state of Ukrainians - Kyivan Rus' - on the basis of not only a non-Ukrainian, but even a non-Slavic people in the 12th century - the foundations of the state organization were laid, which slowly began to assume not only a leading role in the history of Ukraine, but also to claim its historical heritage and even the name Rus, although it had no rights to that heritage or to the name Russia" . This is what the Russian historian Vasyl Klyuchevskiy wrote about the ancestors of the Russians (so-called "Great Russians"): "The first separate principalities into which, starting from the 12th century, Kyivan Rus was divided, were also not ethnically homogeneous. In the northeast of Russia, as a result of the subjugation of the Finnish tribes, a new ethnic group was formed, which in the 19th century was called the Great Russians"

"During the 11th and 14th centuries, a huge state populated by numerous non-Slavic ethnic groups arose in the northwest around the territory of the Novgorod lands. The inner circle of Finno-speaking tribes in the north — Karels, Votyaks, Izhorts (Ingras) and Veps — was governed directly from Novgorod, the outer circle was subject to weak indirect tribute authority. Finno-speaking Lapps in the Far North and further in the northeast also Finno-speaking Zyryans and Permians, Ugromov Ostyaks and Voguls, as well as Samoyeds belonged here."

"The emergence of Muscovy in the second half of the 13th century was facilitated by Mengu-Timur, Feodora Sartakivna, and Peter Ordynskyi. The 16-year-old son of Alexander Nevsky became the first prince of Moscow." - Alexander Nevsky, just another occupier who wasn't loved by people of Novgorod at all and became "Saint" in russia XV century, when a great historiographical myth about this prince began to take shape.

Prince Alexander really succeeded in intrigues against his own brothers and neighbouring princes. "Andriy Yaroslavovych (brother of Alexander. - V.B.), becoming the Prince of Volodymyr (Grand Duke. - V.B.), concluded an alliance with the strong prince of Southern Rus (Kyivan Rus; with such tricks they try to convince us that there was another Rus - V.B.) Danylo Romanovych Halytsky, marrying his daughter, and trying to conduct politics independent of the Golden Horde. But in 1252, Batyi organized military actions against Andriy and Danylo. Against the Galician prince, Batyi sent an army of Kuremsa, which did not succeed, and against Andrii - an army under the command of Nevryuy, which ravaged the outskirts of Pereyaslavl. In the same year, even before Nevryu's campaign (pay special attention to this fact! - V.B.), Alexander went to Batyi, received a label for the Volodymyr Grand Duchy, and after returning settled in Volodymyr. From 1252 until his death in 1263, Alexander (Nevsky. - V.B.) was the Grand Duke of Volodymyr." / "Batkivshchyna" magazine #11, 1993, p. 29./

"...it was Alexander's collaborationism towards the Mongols, his betrayal of the brothers Andriy and Yaroslav in 1252, that caused the Golden Horde to establish a yoke in Rus." / "Batkivshchyna" magazine No. 11, 1993, p. 30./

"The population of the Moscow principality grew rapidly due to the flow of colonizers: the southern, from the lands of Vyatichi and the Kyiv region, and the western, from the Polatsk, Novgorod, and Smalensk lands, as well as immigrants from Western Tartary. The incoming population mixed with the Finnish tribes - Meri and Muroma - who had long lived in these lands." Alberto Campenze, in a letter to Pope Clement VII around 1523-1534, wrote about the Moscow principality (Moscovia) that it was inhabited by various peoples: Yugras, Karelians, Pechorans, Vogulychis, Cheremis

In 1493, Ivan III independently added to his grand ducal domain a prefix - "all of Rus," which was not found in the Moscow princes in older documents and was not recognized by other monarchs.

"In all this [built by Ivan III] - in church and secular buildings, in the names and dedications of churches, in inscriptions or chronicles about the construction - there is almost no hint or even allusion of Kyiv's heritage. The temples, with some details of the Italian Renaissance, are generally modelled after Russian Upper Volga cities such as Vladimir and Suzdal, but not Kyiv. There is neither the Tithe Church, nor Borysoglibska, nor even St. Sophia (as in Novgorod and Polatsk) - despite the fact that Ivan's second wife, who obviously put a lot of effort into creating a new image of the capital, was named Sophia (Zoya). As for the gates of the Moscow Kremlin, not only were none of them named after the famous Kyiv gates (especially the Golden Gate), but the inscription on the main one was not written in Cyrillic, but in Latin! A hundred years later, Boris Godunov, in accordance with his grandiose plan to renew the capital, partially rebuilt the Kremlin and added a bell tower, and again, the same striking absence of Kyiv reminiscences. These people have never even thought about Kyiv." - Edward Keenan. Russian historical myths [Archived August 9, 2019 at the Wayback Machine]. Kyiv: "Krytyka", 2001.— 284 p.— P. 8-9

"The rise of Muscovy began under the vassalage of Ivan III, who conquered, either by force or by agreements, the lands surrounding the Muscovite principality: the largest trade center, Veliky Novgorod, was taken thanks to a crusade organized in alliance with the Tatars, the main slogan of which was: "force Novgorodians to appoint archbishops in Moscow" (the Novgorodians sent ambassadors to the canonical Metropolitan of Kyiv to consecrate an archbishop for them), as well as the principalities of Tver, Rostov, Yaroslavl and Ryazan."

"His policy was continued by his son Vasyl III (1505-1533) and grandson Ivan IV the Terrible (1533-1584), and later by representatives of the Godunov dynasty (descendants of the Chetov princes of the Golden Horde)."

British historian Norman Davis in his own work "Europe. History" describes the process of the appearance of the ethnonym "Russia" in Muscovy:

Muscovite princes rose from darkness to shining heights within two centuries after the Mongol invasion.

First, by combining conquest and bribery, they brought under their control numerous principalities of the Rurikovichs around the Volodymyr-Suzdal land. In 1364, they appropriated the hereditary title of Grand Dukes of Volodymyr.

Secondly, enjoying the favor of the khan of the Golden Horde, the Moscow princes received a label that gave them the right to be the main collector of tribute for the Tatars, they were responsible for the payments and debts of the rest of the princes. Ivan I (ruled 1325-1340), known as Kalita, spent most of his reign not in Moscow, but on the way to Sarai.

Third, by generously endowing the Orthodox Church, the Moscow princes added an aura of piety to their political power. In 1300, the Metropolitan of Kyiv moved his seat (residence) from Kyiv to Volodymyr nad Klyazma, and in 1308 to Moscow. Monasteries founded in forest forests were new centers of trade and territorial expansion.

Muscovites gained strength but were still vassals [of the Golden Horde]. It was at that time that Muscovites began to call their state by the Greek word "Russia," which meant "Rus," and called themselves Russians. These Muscovites never owned Kyiv, but the lack of grounds did not prevent them from considering Moscow the only legal heir to Kyiv lands. It was their speech that became the basis of the modern Russian language.

"Another strange and still unnoticed manifestation of the interruption of tradition or historical amnesia can be seen from the names that the Moscow nobility gave to their children. It is worth talking about the importance of this act for any culture, its symbolic meaning, cultural conditioning, and subjection to fashion. Historical sources from the time of Ivan the Terrible have preserved the names of thousands of men from the upper class. In terms of uniformity, they did not differ from names in other societies. The ten most common names covered 70% of the people, and the rest were rare. The most popular were the names of the rulers of the Moscow dynasty — Ivan (20%) and Vasiliy (10%). Nothing unexpected. What is really surprising if you adhere to traditional ideas about this culture is the almost complete absence of specifically Kyivan names. Among the almost three thousand names in the digit books of Ivan's time, there are no Igors, Svyatoslavs, Mstislavs, less than 1% of the Volodymyr and only three of Gleb. The Moscow courtier of Ivan's time would rather be called Temir or Bulgak than Volodymyr, Gleb or Vsevolod". - Edward Keenan. Russian historical myths. Kyiv: "Krytyka", 2001. — 284 p. — p. 9

The very fact that Russia, having received its name no earlier than the 18th century, claimed the historical heritage of Russia, created seven hundred years earlier, gave Karl Marx the reason to assert in his work "Exposure of the Diplomatic History of the 18th Century":

«The bloody mire of Mongolian slavery, not the rude glory of the Norman epoch, forms the cradle of Muscovy, and modern Russia is but a metamorphosis of Muscovy».

At the same time, the names "Russia" and "Russian" of Greek origin "literate people began to introduce into the book language" from the 16th century. - Historical grammar of the Russian language, compiled by Ө. Буслаевымъ. Fifth edition. Etymology.— M., 1881.— P. 5.

#hetalia #hws ukraine #aph ukraine #hws belarus #aph belarus #tw: hws aph russia #WE ARE NOT FUCKING SIBLINGS #LEARN HISTORY

22 notes · View notes