@@MateoF Sure, I can. What I mean about the borders being the "weakest part" is that they were clearly drawn without any attention to details or without trying to trace them from the original maps. This creates a sense of "border gore", because they are drawn like no borders ever would be, and clearly not like they were actually looking like. That makes them look rather inaccurate and kind of like a doodle, not like a map and it is clear they were drawn by the eye and not traced or anything. That just makes them look really bad, especially when you are already used to how Grand Duchy of Lithuania or Poland were supposed to look like. Sometimes they can be a bit historically inaccurate as well. Like, don't get me wrong, they are still not terrible, and the plot and the historical knowledge and voiceover are really good and that's why I'm watching these, but borders are just something I have to cringe through and hope they won't make me cringe too much. I hope you don't mind.
Именно с именем князя Рюрика связано первое упоминание о Новгороде в летописи 859 года: "И принял всю власть один Рюрик, и пришел к Ильменю, и срубил городок под Волхвом, и назвал его Новгород, и сел тут княжить, раздавать волости и города рубить"
@@algalkin Таких летописей нет,летописи появились лет через 300 и информация была там искажённая.Тем более вставляли чтобы узаконить права Киева и Рюриковичей на Новгород.Здесь только архиологии может помочь.А она говорит что Новгород был до Рюрика.
@@rusgercin9630 да археология как бы говорит, что Новгород в современном месте был основан даже позже этой даты, а именно в 930 году. То есть летопись ещё его "старит". Было, конечно, "Рюриково Городище", но это не совсем Новгород и там тоже непонятно.
@@ddd7386 Ну в любом случае по летописи ориентироваться. Можно только в общих чертах, так как кто такой Рюрик , уже сказать даже тогда не могли, а когда и кто кого основал тоже самое.Остается только догадываться.
With a little-known historical fact today that the basis of the Slavic population of Moscow are the ancient tribes of the Vyatichs, who according to the Russian chronicle are the Lyakhs... In fact, one nation that was divided by religion, some became Catholic Poles, others became Orthodox Russians. Vyatichi: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vyatichi
@@rodjarrow6575 Many Slavic tribes participated in the formation of RUSSIA, including the Polyan tribe. it was this tribe that became the center of the formation of Poland. also, the association of Slavic tribes that formed Russia included such tribes as the White Croats and Ilmen Slovenes (the area of Veliky Novgorod), and there were two dozen Slavic tribes united in Russia, plus or minus, the same association included Finnish and Turkic tribes, in the 15th-16th century Siberian tribes were also joined
@stantheman276So basically your argument is that a bunch of people instead of selecting their own leaders, chose to select a foreigner and then hail his line as the line of royalty and as Prince, literally going against nearly every known case of tribe selecting leaders in the world at that time. Nice try, buddy.
@@RickFoxChicken And even that is a Iie. Revizioned history where "USA" singIe handedIy defeated nzis. But in fact, 80% of fighting was done by Soviets.
Reasonably so. Eastern European history is a mess of names of rulers significant towns and areas, dates of fights, of election of new ruler, of the downfall of empires, of revolutions etc. It's not history that a child can meaningfuly keep up with. In Greece we did learn a tiny amount of Lithuanian Polish empire, the Kievan Rus, the Mongols and Tartars and the Vikings of the north etc. Yet none will remember they were even taught any of these.
It's interesting to me that both Western Europe and Eastern Europe were significantly influenced by the two halves of the Roman Empire. The West dominated by Roman Catholicism while the East dominated by Constantinople's Orthodoxy.
Russian historians simply designated the time period "Kievan Rus" to separate this period from the period of "feudal fragmentation", after which Rus' forever became Muscovite.
Oh then what were they called mr apollo?@@apollo5261 Cause the Russian empire existed since the 16th century and they were the Rus state before that. I dearly hope you wont call it Ukraine because that didnt exist since 1917
Oleg didn't 'found the Kievan Rus'. Kievan Rus isn't a historical term, it's one created by 19th-century Russian historians to refer to the part of Russia's history that was centred around Kiev. In its day, Kievan Rus' was just called "the lands of Rus", which means "the lands of Russia" - "Russia" is the Greek phrasing of Rus. And what's retroactively called "Kievan Rus" didn't originate and wasn't founded in Kiev, but began in Novgorod, which was the first capital of "Kievan Rus". When Oleg conquered Kiev, he expanded the lands of Rus' to include Kiev, and then he moved Rus' captial from Novgorod to Kiev. The conquering and capitalising of Kiev wasn't the founding of Oleg's kingdom or a historical state, it was the expanding of one that already existed.
I can't see the previous comment to reply to it directly, for some reason, but that comment is wrong. Rus' is the name of the tribe which then became the Rus' kingdom with its capital in Novgorod, and which later moved its capital to Kiev in 882. Kiev is older than Novgorod, but Rus' didn't originate in Kiev, and the pre-Rus' Kiev has nothing to do with Russia or Ukraine. Kiev being older than Novgorod really has no relevance to this discussion. The Rus' tribe also predates Novgorod, and they lived in regions further east of Novgorod, though they first formed a state with Novgorod as its capital: "The two original centres of Rus' were Staraja Ladoga and Rurikovo Gorodishche, two points on the Volkhov, a river running for 200 km between Lake Ilmen in the south to Lake Ladoga in the north." "According to the first Russian annals, the Primary Chronicle, Rurik was a Scandinavian "from the tribe of the Rus" whom the people of Novgorod invited in 862 to assume rule over them, as they had been unable to govern themselves. Accompanied by his family and retinue, Rurik settled in Novgorod, and his brothers took control of adjacent regions. The area under their authority came to be called "the land of the Rus" and eventually Rus'. The descendants of Rurik continued to rule over this region following his death about 873."
@@__Ruslan_Nedokolenko__ Quoted from the OP: I can't see the previous comment to reply to it directly, for some reason, but that comment is wrong. Rus' is the name of the tribe which then became the Rus' kingdom with its capital in Novgorod, and which later moved its capital to Kiev in 882. Kiev is older than Novgorod, but Rus' didn't originate in Kiev, and the pre-Rus' Kiev has nothing to do with Russia or Ukraine. Kiev being older than Novgorod really has no relevance to this discussion. The Rus' tribe also predates Novgorod, and they lived in regions further east of Novgorod, though they first formed a state with Novgorod as its capital: "The two original centres of Rus' were Staraja Ladoga and Rurikovo Gorodishche, two points on the Volkhov, a river running for 200 km between Lake Ilmen in the south to Lake Ladoga in the north." "According to the first Russian annals, the Primary Chronicle, Rurik was a Scandinavian "from the tribe of the Rus" whom the people of Novgorod invited in 862 to assume rule over them, as they had been unable to govern themselves. Accompanied by his family and retinue, Rurik settled in Novgorod, and his brothers took control of adjacent regions. The area under their authority came to be called "the land of the Rus" and eventually Rus'. The descendants of Rurik continued to rule over this region following his death about 873."
@@thischannel1071 Про Рюрика мы знаем из летописей написанных Нестором через столетия после описываемых им событий. Кроме этого упоминания, нет никаких других источников. Рюрик это легендарная личность. По археологическим данным, культурный слой ранее X века в Новгороде не обнаружен, но легендарный Рюрик, каким то образом, там смог появиться в IX. Никто из киевских князей в летописях не упоминается как Рюрикович. По летописям, Русь локализуется как Киев, Чернигов, Переяслав... Новгородцы не являются русинами - они новгородцы, и никак иначе. В летописи за 1141 год читаем: "А когда Святослав (Ольгович) удирал из Новгорода в Русь к брату, то послал Всеволод навстречу ему". То есть, Новгород, не является Русью.
@@thischannel1071 (translated by app) We know about Rurik from the chronicles written by Nestor centuries after the events he describes. Apart from this mention, there are no other sources. Rurik is a legendary person. According to archaeological data, no cultural layer earlier than the 10th century was found in Novgorod, but the legendary Rurik, somehow, could appear there in |X. None of the Kievan princes is mentioned in the annals as Rurikovich. According to the annals, Rus' is localized as Kyiv, Chernigov, Pereyaslav... Novgorodians are not Rusyns - they are Novgorodians, and nothing else. In the annals for 1141 we read: “And when Svyatoslav (Olgovich) fled from Novgorod to Rus' to his brother, Vsevolod sent to meet him.” That is, Novgorod is not Rus.
GET OUT OF MY HEAD GET OUT OF MY HEAD GET OUT OF MY HEAD GET OUT OF MY HEAD GET OUT OF MY HEAD GET OUT OF MY HEAD GET OUT OF MY HEAD GET OUT OF MY HEAD
East slavic tribes -Kryvich, vyatich, drevlyane existed long before Ryurik. They had their own Kings, localized fights between each other , eventually mingled and united starting Russian nation. Ryurik was invited by people of Novgorod.
Rurik was proven a made up legend, not historical fact. DNA tests of Rurikid dynasty bodies were made, they had indeed scandinavian ancestry, but from 11th century, not 9th.
@@andrade4630 My friend Google is not opening, I need help. Can you tell me where the Turks live, the names of a few Turkish empires and a few modern Turkish states?
Its very important. Please translate: Я недавно был в россии. И так, что удалось выяснить по России и русским: - Что меня удивило.... Русские сознательно отказываются от благ цивилизации. И бравируют этим. Они прямо в лицо говорят, что мне не нужен ваш мерседес, я хочу ездить на машине отечественного производства. А интернет мы свой построим. - всю жизнь русских держали в скотском состоянии. И вдруг появилось окно возможностей ярко прожить последние 5-10 дней и умереть в окопе в кругу побратимов. Поэтому они еще долго будут идти убивать. Эта самая большая беда для Украины. И главная мотивация русских. Это необходимо понимать. - русские искренне хотят стереть американцев с лица Земли и радуются их любой неудаче. - русские мечтают дойти до пролива Ла-Манш - Русские хотят уничтожить украинцев. Вначале войны они говорили что хотят просто проучить, как старший брат наказать младшего за непослушание. Теперь русские собираются воевать до тех пор, пока Украина не перестанет быть пригодной для жизни. Возможны временные передышки для набора сил. - Путин был обычным вором. Императором его сделал русский народ, а не пропаганда. - Сегодня русские недовольны только тем, что Путин до сих пор не применил ядерное оружие. - Даже если Украина освободит все свои территории война не закончится. Решить проблему можно только развалом России, чтобы понизить градус имперского величия. Факт - в Европе не понимают на сколько велик этот градус. - Русские готовы терпеть десятки лет любые лишения (ЛЮБЫЕ), лишь бы Украина жила плохо. - Усиление сепаратистских настроений внутри России не приведет к результату. Даже в национальных республиках имперское величие на первом месте. Например в той же Башкирии массам плевать на национальную идентичность. Да и в Казани то же. На митинги они идут только потому что хотят на время почувствовать себя людьми. Но чего то серьезного от них не ждите. - во все времена, всякого рода иностранных авантюристов привлекала Россия. Много ли сегодня таких компаний, которые готовы поставлять в русский Рейх любые товары? ДЕСЯТКИ ТЫСЯЧ. И что прикажете с этим делать? - Запад верит, что русские хотят свободы. Это не просто ошибочное суждение. Это опасное заблуждение. Ответственно заявляю, что подавляющее большинство не хотят. - в США люди живут в стереотипах и мифах о "хорошем народе" и плохом президенте, романтизируя русскую культуру и не понимая, что русская культура - это ФАСАД, за которым скрываются потемкинские деревни. - В США не понимают, что государства Россия уже нет, есть криминальные группировки, которые делят воровской "общаг" и у которых в собственности около 100 000 000 поголовья скота. - Русские не могут дать ничего этому миру. Поэтому ни хотят его уничтожить - Жены мобилизованных играют не последнюю роль, мотивируя своих свинособак пойти на войну и сдохнуть в окопе. "Ты что не мужик"? - похрюкивают свиноматки. - Не Путин убивал украинцев в Буче, Гостомеле, Ирпени, Мариуполе, а простые руские работяги, которых оправдывдывает русская оппозиция, сбежавшая на Запад и морочащая вам головы. Все независимые опросы подтверждают что русские поддерживают войну в Украине. Все - от детей средних классов до старых советских пенсионеров. Не из страха поддеерживают. Искренне поддерживают и всегда эб этом мечтали. Руссские улыбаются когда очередная ракета попадает в жилой дом в Украине. - Русский - это не национальнсть, это состояние души абсолютного раба, готового исполнить любые преступные приказы. В любой стране есть люди с подобной ментальностью, скажете вы. Да. Только в России их не 8-12%, как в цивилизованных странах, а 85-89%. - Оппозиция любит говорить что выборы в России были нечестными. Да, но если бы они были честными, то Путин набрал бы не меньше 75%. Он бы потерял голоса тех избирателей, которые считают Путина достаточно мягким.
One thing to note is that the map shows some bodies of water that did not exist until 20th century. Rybinsk Reservoir is an example. It might be worth trying to find older digitized maps for future presentations if those are available.
@@maciej009 The Poles are still upset with the Russians because Alexander Suvorov defeated Warsaw and half of Poland and ruled over Polish territory for over 120 years.
@@Ruan-z6e Suvorov defeated the Kościuszko Insurgents, fighting against the OCCUPIERS, who partitioned Polish in three (Russia, Prussia, Austria) and murdered 20,000 civilians in Warsaw. Russia itself has never occupied Polish. After losing in 1920, it did so together with Germany on 17.09.1939 (Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact)
12:28 no natural obstacles or resistance? Are you kidding? It was almost impossible to get to Siberia, they had to drag their ships through mountains,set a stay and live through the winter with almost no food and equipment and then conquer the Siberian tribes while Moscow almost didn’t care about them thus no more people or weapons, keep in mind that it was an unfriendly places with severe weather and they was just a group of Cossacks
Yermak is the conqueror of Siberia, he was a bandit and a robber and was caught and brought to trial, but he was asked that he would choose execution or serve Russia, he chose to serve and he was told that he should look and explore unknown and wild lands called Siberia
It is amazing how many times people of this region have fought, merged, divided, turned on allies, became friendly with past enemies and done it over and over again. Up to and including the year 2022.
How is history of Europe different? England, France, Spain, Papal states, Austria(Austro-Hungarian empire), German principalities(latter Prussia)... 7 years war, 30 years war, 100 years war... Stewart's dynasty, Bourbons, Habsburgs, Popes... All stabbing each other backs/creating alliances in order to keep balance of power. Old news.
@@aleksandarcvetkovic5436 It's not except this is post WWII, modern world with protections in place by Russia and most other countries in the world. Has Russia not learned it's lessons. Putin is a madman, no different than Hitler.
@@nickmcnellis3937 Eh, world of politics and powerful states is full of mad people. One can say Gulf war, invasion on Iraq, destroying Lybia, turning head when Saudi Arabia attacks Yemen was also act of mad people. But those kind of things depend from what side one gains perspective. Justifying war is diplomatic skill to convince own people and others that reason is righteous. Bad thing is opposite side does the same. I don't like NATO and Russia with same intensity. Both are warmongers accusing other one for warmongering.
их подвела демократия - они очень сложно принимали даже простые государственные решения. пытались учитывать мнение каждого дворянина. в то время побеждали более централизованные государства. да и всегда это будет. для простого населения это как правило незаметно никак.
@@parsifal6094more sarmatian culture and democracy only for those people Like one of thos bums could make whole discussion in senate not important by saying liberum veto
I took a Russian history class in undergrad about 20 years ago, and I really, REALLY wish that they would have used the map visuals that you did, because holy shiz this was WAY more interesting now than reading it in text and listening to lectures back then. A monk became tsar by bullshitting...unreal.
Moreover, Rurik represented the south Baltic Slavs. So, it was alright for Slavic people to invite an influential Slavonic ruler to rule. After all, who would ever invite a foreigner to rule over their land (as these western morons want us to believe)?
@@N0NamedGui well, I do sound alright. the key thing is that Rurik and his family were Slavonians, unlike the false history insinuations about his Scandinavian origin. back then, as always, people did care about culture. it was important for the ruler to come from a similar or identical culture, ans speak the same language, otherwise it would've been a slavery. only slaves do not need to understand the language of the ruler. so, think twice before you write something here
@@M7i7k7h7a7i7l they originated from Scandinavia, but we're rulers of sorbs(I suppose that how some of the west Slavs were called). Also, as I already said, being Sorb or Bolgarian is like being foreigner to East Slavs, because they already splitted, they have different languages, and even different religion. Otherwise they wouldn't raid eachother so much.
Fun Fact: It was Russia who saved The Union during the American Civil War as they sent their Navy to San Francisco and New York when England and France were just about to enter the war on the side of the Confederates since London created the Confederates. France was already in Mexico making a spear head movement to resupply the Confederates and to open up a Pacific Theatre and to create a port in California. England already amassed 11,000 troops and growing stationed at their Northern Confederacies border now called Canada ready to open a Northern Theatre to divert Union troops away from their Southern Confederacy then to attack The Unions naval blockade. The Union would have been completely destroyed and annexed by those two great powers leaving the Confederates to exist as a puppet state of London. London was already courting (threatening/bribing) other countries to get involved like Spain while Russia was in talks with Prussia to ally with incase London was to intervene. Seeing all of this Tsar Alexander II wrote a letter to Queen Victoria saying “If you enter in this war it will be a casus belli for all out war with the Russian Empire”. The stage was set for the 1st World War and Russia stopped it. There is also a memorial in San Francisco for the hundreds of Russian sailors who came off their Asiatic fleet ships that died while helping the city put out a fire that threatened to lay waste to it during the War.
@@sravasaksitam The Russian fleet also threatened to Shell Australian ports along with other British Pacific Colonies if Britain aided the Confederates. A confederate war ship spent a lot of time in Australian waters and was supported by the Australian public, some even signing on as crew members. This Confederate war ship laid waist to the US Pacific whaling fleet and is reported to have fired the last shot in the war Russia also helped Thailand (Kingdom of Siam) maintain its sovereignty from being completely Partitioned/Annexed from the British and French around the same time. The very word Thai (ไทย) means 'free man' in the Thai language which is partially to thank to the Russians as they might have ended up being a colony or part of another country/colony if not for their intervention.
@@JPJ432russia is to responsible for dozen of independent movements in africa or created indirectly the finish state, after 700 years of swedish occupition did russia conquer finland in the wars and gave the fins a country with real borders, autonomy what was a last step to become independent and they dozen of monuments from alexander the second in finland, another example is the armenian genocide, after tsar nicholas heard about it he instantly send hes soldirs to the caucasus to help the people, 394k armenians got saved what was 99% of the population, tsar nicholas is the main reason why this nation exists today
The Civil War was almost entirely a ground war, so it is amazing how a few Russian ships out in the ocean could have made much of a difference. They didn't stop the Confederates from trading cotton or tobacco with Europeans in exchange for weaponry. So you might say the Russians did almost nothing.
@@texaswunderkind For a little more context: The British (City of London) are the ones who created our divide in the first place to put brother against brother. After the war Lincoln wanted to rebuild the South and had plans to do so. He and half his Cabinet were assassinated by London. Many of the others that survived had multiple assassination attempts on them especially William Seward who had like a dozen or so, many almost killing him. Most of the Operations for the Civil War and post war plans and assassinations were made in London and then sent to Montreal a hub for spies and intel in the Americas for the British Empire then passed through to Confederate President Jefferson Davis to follow the orders. Many of the South's own leaders were selling out the South to British interest even General Lee. Unfortunately London had many of their Tentacles and Webs on both sides. Lincoln stated that the Department Of State is completely controlled by British Interest that he had to constantly fight against. It was in the 1870s that a Paradigm Shift happened were the British took control within the Reunited States through subversion (which was easy to do so as all their agents were brought back into the Union and a large part of their opposition killed) and have had it all the way up to this day. Some presidents fought against it like Garfield, McKinley, Harding, Roosevelt, and Kennedy and all were killed. Probably the best book to read on the subject is "The Clash of the Two Americas. The Unfinished Symphony" by Matthew Ehret. I have no affiliation with them but they also have an audiobook which can make it easier since not many people like to sit down and read anymore. It has multiple references on the bottom of each page of the book.
2:52 "yaroslav the wise" a wise king! nice can't wait for all his great reforms 3:28 "yaroslav devides the Kievan Rus among his sons" (╯°□°）╯︵ ┻━┻ DAMN IT YAROSLAV
@@OrkosUA comprasion is incorrect obviously, but this was first written law in the medieval state of Rus, and geographically also first for future Russian State, which is direct successor to the north-eastern principalities, broken up from Kievan Rus. More clearly, Suzdal-Vladimir principality splited from Kievan Rus, and was using laws of Yaroslav, and after Mongol invasion, when Suzdal and Vladimir were brutally sacked and destroyed, principality splited again, and one of them was principality of Moscow, which after three hundred years of reunification, will finally assume title of Tsar. So it's not like Romania and Rome, because it's countinious, has similar dynasty and religion, and some cultural stuff is much closer.
@@tyryonolofing3405 don't bother explaining history to Ukrainian. They are still pissed they were left on outskirts (the literal translation of the name "Ukraine") while their heirs ran north and freed themselves from Mongols and Poles several hundred years earlier than they did with the Ukraine. The fact Rurikids had continuous dynasty up to 1530es first relocating to Vladimir way before the Mongol invasion and then ending up in Moscow - Vladimir's colony - wont fit in his mind.
@@cianakril may be.. But I still hope for the best. Also, you see, in reality it's even more complicated, because boyar's families of Moscow, Novgorod and Lithuanian-controled parts of Rus, including cadet braches of Rurikid and Olgedovich's. In fact, Shyiskie were cadet branch for Rurikid dynasty, and that was enough to accept their overturn against poland-backed Lzhedmitriy. And one of the most powerful, and crucial supporter of Romanovs in their attempt to assume tsardom in 1613 was boyar house Trubetskiye, who were.. Cadet branch for former Lithuanian kingdom dynasty.
Ivan Turgenev once wrote: "Nature creates while destroying, and doesn't care whether it creates or destroys as long as life isn't extinguished, as long as death doesn't lose its rights"
That is the law of the entire Universe. Matter and life are all cyclical. But do we understand the why? Why is existence in an ever expanding Universe cyclical instead of a steady line of immortal progression? Does the illusion of choice which humans and other animals make really even matter in the grand scheme of things here on Earth when eventually our Sun will die too? All of our historical choices will be for naught. The rest of the Universe does not care.
To those who debate on whether the Kievan Rus was Russian or Ukrainian, I challenge you to provide an answer to the question of whether Charlemagne's empire was French or German as it is a similar question to the one you are trying to answer.
@@nathanpangilinan4397 France and Germany made up it is time for Ukraine and Russia to do the same . They are one people divided over time . They are both the successors of Kievan Rus . Only one is in line with the West and the other is ...well ...Russia
No dude. They presented "history of USA as UK" here. Its diffrent story. Sioux will never be brit same as Russian will never be Rusyn, who is slavic, european like brit. Difference is that there is no sea beteeen colony (Russia) and orgin (Ruś).
@@timkruger7365 not the point. the point is that where was no such country with name "Kievan Rus". How old is Kiev is completely different discussion. I don't know where you get 400, most likely 50-150 older
@@kykah01 There was no such country as Ancient Egypt. The term Ancient was applied well during the Common Era and the actual name of the country was Kumat. Words exist to simplify communication. Just like in "Ancient Egypt" the word "Ancient" serves to clarify that we are indeed talking about the period of history before Christ, the word "Kievan" simply emphasizes that we're talking about the period of history when Kiev was the center, nothing more, nothing less. Otherwise we'd need to rename Germany into Deutschland, Japan into Nippon and Greece into Ellada.
Yeap, I was searching such a comment, because that is true - we - Russians fight and lost, fight and lost time and time again, but the Mongol horde lost a part of their numbers - of course I want to say major part, but I do not now numbers, so let limit only to part. Why Mongols win? Because feudal diversity - one "prince " we call kniaz - князь - can fight alone against whole of horde and eventually lose to power of numbers, tactics and superior power of cavalry units, later on Huangary fight also in hard battles mainly due to internal problems between monarch and aristocracy, also lose, go to retreat, some years later return to already diminished force due to attrition from fight and diseases which also were at way back to Mongol capital due the death of chan
@@НикитаГруздов-т8э It's something I'm sympathetic to, because the common understanding of Chinese resistance was "China fell, Yuan was declared, and then the Mongols conquered everyone". this comes from a misunderstanding of the "China among Equals" period, where the Jurchen (proto Manchu) dynasty was able to conquer a significant chunk of the northern heartland, including Beijing, and declared themselves as the holders of the Mandate of Heaven. They fell to the Mongols quickly, but the Song dynasty held out long enough (till 1279) for the Mongols to have brought over Persian trebuchets, subjugated the Russian principalities (1230s-40s), invaded Lithuania, Poland, the Romanian principalities, Hungary, Austria, northeast Italy, Croatia, Serbia, and Bulgaria (1240s), sacked Baghdad, and pushed into Anatolia and the Levant before they fell.
Kievan Rus it’s period until lands were divide between princes. This term was introduced in the 20th century to define a period of time when the capital was in Kyiv.
@@Roma-cn8vd интересно, а какая же тогда история? Расскажи-ка мне Весь мир твердит одну историю, а в Украине, ПОСЛЕ 14 ГОДА, другую Хотя можешь и не пытаться, ведь всё равно твои слова окажутся полным бредом
you have nothing to do with those bulgarians because they were turkic of mongolian race, and you are slavic of european race. you simply stole their name.
@@joedoe9208 That's complete BS, very few Bulgarians are of 100% Slavic origin and genetic studies prove it too. Don't spread stupid sh*t on the internet.
When someone says "Kievan Rus" he can turn his diploma back to McDonalds. This term appeared in XX century and refers to historical period, it was never a name of country.
Rus' and Russia is not the same. It is like Rome and Romania. russian ancestors - the most insignificant remnants of Ugrians, Finns and other defeated nomadic and semi-nomadic tribes.
@@sirenka9192 Russia is a latin version of name "Rus", on western maps Rus was marked as Russia. This version of Ugrian-finns ancestors is popular between ukrainian nazis, but genetic researches show that it is false.
@@TheLustmord88 Not exactly, Russia (Рѡсїѧ) is the Greek word for the name Rus' (Русь). When the tsar of the Moscovites Peter 1 issued a decree on the renaming of Moskovia, it was a deliberate theft of the Rus brand, but he could not rename it directly, so he used the Greek word. Moskovia is the same Rus' as Abibas is Adidas. The reason for such theft was that historically the lands of Moskovia inhabited by wild Ugro-Finnish tribes left the Stone Age relatively recently, only in the 10th century AD, but mentally they are still in the Stone Age.
@@sirenka9192 No historical documents can prove it, while all documents we have and archeology prove it's wrong, but ukrainian nazis like to believe this delusion.
Well Siberia was an empty wasteland and it was completely uninhabitable, it had a lot of natural resources but nobody new that until the Russians came along. They quickly expanded and claimed the whole region because there was no human resistance as they were the first to claim the area
Sometimes i am puzzled by what Russia was capable of. Why is it we never learnt about these great conquest of land and only learnt about the Roman Empire?
Understanding what? Primitive Russophobic propaganda? It was exposed back in the 17th century by the Russian historian, academician Lomonosov: the version that Rurik is of Scandinavian origin was invented by the Swedes during their war with Peter 1. This is banal, military propaganda. Rurik was from the Baltic Slavs, and this is officially recognized by all real historians. And advice for the future: in relation to Russia, from English-speaking sources - you will never hear anything but lies and propaganda. You can not even hope to find at least something true - you will not find it.
@@alexgainsborough4921 Ukrainians are Polished Russians who arose during the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth. You are afraid to admit it because it is a nightmare for you.
There are such a good scenario in this it could be used for a 8 seasons TV show like Game of thrones :) Joke apart, this is truly interesting... and complex history !
indeed it is! For example before Ivan III the Great was Visilliy II the Dark - his face was mutilated and he was blinded by his rivals who hope he will never get on the throne being blind, but he claimed the throne and rule for the 37 years
You should definitely do a video about the Frankish empire/francia. Its such an interesting topic and era and I would love to see a video from this channel made about this!
And Bloody Mary (Mary I of England) wasn't called bloody for nothing. Comparing to his collogues from the Western Europe of the same period he was almost a saint.
@@РоманДмитриев-ь3ю Территория Украины, тогда называлась Русь,а предки украинцев русами,русинами.Еще с 17 века сохранилась Печать Ивана Выговского,где он- Воевода Киевский Княжества Рускаго.А также Богдан Хмельницкий заключал договора от имени народа Рускаго, например «Договор между Турецким цесарем и Войском Запорожским и народом Русьским о торговле на Черном море», - так называемая Черноморская конвенция Украины с Турцией.1649год.
Hungarian capital became a global city after the unification of Buda, Óbuda and Pest on 17 November 1873, with the name 'Budapest'. So no mongol conquerors could do anything about Budapest at the time - for it didn't exist. If it's history then let's take it seriously ;)
Rus’ *not to be confused with “Russia”, which derives its name from the Rus’ but historically is a completely different state, which almost all its existence was at war with the Rus’. Just like the Holy Roman Empire was actually Germany, Russia is actually Muscovy, despite their best attempts to convince everybody otherwise. Its name “Russia" received only in 1721, when Peter I passed a decree to change Tsardom of Muscovy’s name into the “Russian” Empire (“Russia” originates from Rosia, name used by the Greek Orthodox Clergy in regards to Kyivan Rus') Under the reign of Cathrine II Muscovites where even pushed for continuing to identify as Muscovites, and where forced to call themselves “Russian”. Lands that “Russia” claims were part of the original Rus’, but actually weren't, are Novgorod, Suzdal, and Ryazan, since in historical texts of XI-XII centuries they are mentioned as separate entities from Rus’. They can be considered parts of extended Rus’, although their culture was distinct from main Rus’. In 1493 Moscow prince Ivan III appointed himself to be the Great Ruler of All Rus’. No other kings acknowledged that. From that point on Muscovy started to make false claims on Rus’ ownership. “Russia” is an offshoot of Ukraine and not the other way round, despite what Soviet and “Russian” historians have been trying to say for years. Kiev was a developed cultured capital when Moscow was just another swamp village. Germany used to call itself the Holy Roman Empire, that didn’t mean they became the Romans, and all of a sudden had a right to claim whole of Italy and its history, but yet, that’s exactly what “Russia” did in regards to Rus’-Ukraine.
@@vredacted3125 "“Russia” is an offshoot of Ukraine" Do you even understand how absolutely stupid this sounds? Ukraine is just a Russian word for "border region". Russia started in Kiev and even though it lost Kiev for some time, that doesn't mean that somehow Russia now is an offshoot of the "border region". Stop pushing this weird propaganda. Stop rewriting history.
@@DoubleBob Ukraine in russian kinda sound like border land. and Russians often speculate that ukraine was border land of russian empire. Itself it doesn't make much sense, since t it's symbols existed long before russian empire took it's name in 18th century. (past 300 years) And in Rus' language Ukraine, one of the meaning is - inner country, meaning, center of Rus'
@@vredacted3125 So, you simply assume that the video is based on fake history and e.g. Kievan Rus didn't exist? Also why do you think the Russian Empire "took" it's name from a country that didn't exist? "And in Rus' language Ukraine, one of the meaning is - inner country, meaning, center of Rus'" Provide some evidence for that, cause I believe you've fallen victim to strange nationalist propaganda that started during the 19th century, but which wasn't remotely mainstream. But why would you believe fringe views that deliberately rewrite history and play word games just to dupe the ignorant into accepting lies.
@@ilyashuster3447 My friend Google is not opening, I need help. Can you tell me where the Turks live, the names of a few Turkish empires and a few modern Turkish states?
1610: Imagine what could happen if polish king didn't want to convert Russia into catholicism and he became Tsar. History would be totally different with Polish-Lithuanian-Russian Empire.
@sir hill Wow! Let’s everyone go back to his indigenous land then! My argument is different. Without Soviet victory there would be neither Poland nor Russia as we know them today. Polish people should be more humble and less full of themselves for Poland was defeated and subdued, what they have now has bee given to them at the expense of millions of German people who were ethnically cleansed from Silesia, East Prussia, and Pomerania.
@sir hill why did the Second World War not begin with the partition of Czechoslovakia by Poland and Germany? Ah, it's inconvenient just to remember it. I understand. I will also add that Poland was divided not by Germany and Russia, but by Germany and the USSR. You need to know the history
@@ericingefara4179 This 1k km2 of Silesia was taken from us by force in 1919, and we agreed to keep it in Czechoslovakia in 1920, when Red Army was at the Warsaw gates. Btw, in 1919 there was approx 150 k. Poles living there, but in 1938 only 20 k.... We were not a signatory of Munich treaty, and we earlier proposed Czechs common defence against Germans, but Benes wonted us to allow Stalin's Red Army to go through Poland with help for them. Great idea! ;-) And contrary to Germans or soviet's we did not threw out people from their houses, nor arrest them and send to Siberia, nor shut in the back of head... That makes the difference which Putin is not telling for an obvious reasons (although he likes to remind this example of "polish aggression" as a counter - example for soviets massive genocide crimes). And if you diversify so strictly between Russia and USSR, why Russians are not doing this, or doing this only to deny ties between soviet genocides and Russia?
More like Polish-Polish-Polish empire. It might have been called Poland-Lithuania, but Lithuanians were marginalised and polonised (and Ruthenians were practically cattle).
There was a fierce stubborn resistance of the Russian Slavs to the Mongol hordes. A lot of examples, incl a town of Koselsk (near modern Ryazan), that had been called The Fierce Town by the Mongols with all of its people incl women fighting to the end. But the forces were clearly unequal. It was a giant Horde and if not for the total Russian resistance that had depleted its initial punch, all of the Europe would have been conquered. You can see it from the sheer size of the Mongol empire set up by Genghis Khan who had subdued the China in the first place
@@12crenshaw Russians did resist the Mongols - hence many burned cities and overall decline of cultural and economic life in Kievan principality that had become the Wild Plain (Dikoe Pole). Those who paid tribute and showed no resistance were not ruined. Poland and Bulgar (Volga bulgars) were also pillaged, if you want to thank them for that, well, up to you.
"The divided principalities did not resist the Mongols"... What an utterly incompetent thing to say. It took almost 5 years to conquer almost all of Rus. Look up the siege of Kozelsk, named the "wicked city" by the Mongols.
@@gifigi600 Not true, Volga Bulgaria was essentially the Bulgars which came to Europe from Asia and the Ural mountains, Volga Bulgaria moved their tribes to their modern position when they were forced to leave river Volga because of Cumania's rapid expansion and the Turkic tribes.
@@gifigi600 not all of them left though. Some stayed and remained the volgha bulgars but those who went south mixed with the local slavs and became the bulgarians.
FYI: this is low-quality content that greatly distorts the real history. A lot of key things are glossed over or distorted, and this creates a completely wrong perception of what really happened. One gets the impression that the author is simply quoting propagandistic history textbooks that have been produced in Moscow for centuries.
This is so interesting and makes you think about the politics of Russia and the immense historical data accessible to them to study in depth civilizations, conflicts, and human nature revealed over centuries. The same thing can be said of china.
One of the things I love about studying history, is that you often can see the unfolding of events over time. For instance, the year of 1848 was pivotal in world history due to the large numbers of wars and rebellions going on. I don't have the energy to type a dissertation, so I'll keep it short. It shaped much of early 20th century Europe, that lead to both World Wars (and several interim conflicts and wars). It also starts to put current events into a different perspective as well. When Russia first moved into Ukraine, Putin said something about reclaiming ancient lands. I'm in no way supporting what he is doing, but objectively; Kiev is 'ancient Russia'. *I will re-iterate. I oppose this illegal war and believe in a free, peaceful and sovereign Ukraine.*
@@matthewmartin5763 If you're using the state of that time as an argument, if anything it should be Kyiv in power over Russia and not the other way round.
Guys! If every country begin to reclaim it's "ancient" territories we suppose to be at constant and forever war. Coz 99% of countries worldwide got an ancient land that belongs to its neighbors at that moment. So what? We all have to fight?! Just imagine about Italy, UK, Germany, Greece, Turkey,.Bulgaria, Hungary, Austria, Norway, Sweden, Denmark, Mongolia and many many more. I even didn't mention both America's, Asia and Africa. What if all of them reclaim their old borders?
@@gordeyvolnik why? is it because you simply don't know the archeological definition of what can be called a city? or a town? do you? can you bring 4 major criteria of the definition of a town?
@@hazelich9113 there is no such the term as "russian city" or "not russian city" in archeology. Besides, city is not a human and can't have a nationality. However archeology has a strict definition of what can be called a town and what can't be called as a settlement. So taking into the consideration the fact that none of you know this, I repeat once again: there was no single town (not even city) on the territory of "rus". The only town was kiev, however it was established by turkic Khazars, not slavs.
Actually, some historians claim that Ivan the Terrible's son was pissed off by his father who strongly disapproved of his wife wearing clothes he hadn't liked and behaving, in Tsar Ivan's opinion, badly. Matter of fact, he even beat her. Ivan's son therefore sticked up for his wife. You know the ending
@@denissuccess3304 actually its more like legend. If you are son of Tsar, your wife have so many servants, who know about clothes and stuff, so its practically impossible to be in front of the Tsar and be dressed improperly.
Just FYI Ivan the Terrible didnt kill that many people compared to other European leaders of that time. The whole 'Terrible' thing is mistranslation imo and the closer one would be Ivan the Fearsome.
@Imaginary Unicorn cant believe I am saying this but check what Bartholomew Night is. Or maybe where did the Aztecs go. Or maybe what Teutons did to the very same Lithuanians you were talking about. Russia surely had its share of terrible dictators but Ivan IV was a pretty good guy by 16th century standarts
Yes , russian word Грозный(that how he called in Russia), not meen terrible , it meen more like a stern maybe or hard , but absolutely not terrible. This word start using britain to demonizated Russia like always
There were many principalities in Rus', and in different periods different principalities had greater influence. First, Novgorod was the most influential, then Kiev became the most influential. then Rus' fell into decline, after which Kiev lost all influence as it was plundered and burned, and the Grand Duchy of Vladimir became the new center of influence in Rus' for objective reasons, then the Grand Duchy of Vladimir turned into the Grand Duchy of Moscow, again simply because on the territory In the most influential Principality of Rus', a new most influential city appeared, which, for objective reasons, like Kiev and Novgorod earlier, began to attract wealth and people, Moscow became the most important trading center of Rus'. And after that, the Grand Duchy of Moscow, having depleted most of the free Rus', Turns into Tsardom of Russia and later into the Russian Empire. Not one historian in the world has no doubts about this. Only among Ukrainians, whose entire Wikipedia is full of both pseudo-history and lies, moreover, closed from editing? How is it that the Ukrainian wiki is 80% different from wikis in any other languages of the world where everything converges into the same facts. What are you afraid of closing articles from editing? What would real historians and scientists not be able to correct this nonsense? And yes, at what point in history, except in your imagination, did the name Muscovy exist as real name of the state?
I think it's because they have a national identity crisis. There are also many nationalistic biggots on both sides (Russia & Ukraine). Just with a logicial & unbiased mindset, anyone should see that they all share the same heritage. It reflects their language, culture & history. Super sad to see how they divided. I personally blame a mixture of the Mongol Invasion, the Polish/Lithuanian Commonwealth & Communism for the division of the Rus (Belarus, Russia, Ukraine)
Muscovy is called in other languages the Grand Duchy of Moscow. Just as the Grand Duchy of Lithuania is simply called Lithuania. This can be seen if you watch this video in different languages (this channel has analogues in different languages and related videos)
@@Ki-dz4ro 1) Anna Yaroslavna (daughter of Prince Yaroslav the Wise and Queen of France) in the west is called Anna Russian. 2) Also Rus' and Russia - the words are similar. 3) The term "Kievan Rus" appeared only in the 19th century, as a designation of the time period when Kyiv was the capital of the country. So was Ladoga Rus (approximately 859-862), Novgorod Rus (862-882), Vladimir Rus (1243-1389), then Moscow Rus (1389-1547 (or 1478)). It was just Rus'. We don't say "Moscow Russia" or "Petersburg Russia", no, we don't. 4) When Kyiv was captured by Prince Oleg, he gave him the title "Mother of Russian Cities". And throughout our history, Kyiv has been with such a title. 5) The art that has developed throughout the history of Rus' is called Old Russian art. (Even on Wikipedia it says) 6) “Let us not disgrace the Russian land, but lie down with bones, for the dead have no shame!” (It is difficult to translate into English) - this is how Prince Svyatoslav addressed the squad before the battle of Arcadiopol in 970. This is the expression of Prince Svyatoslav from "The Tale of Bygone Years". 7)Rus and the Grand Duchy of Moscow and the Russian kingdom (until 1598) were ruled by the Rurik dynasty. That is why the history of Rus' is the history of Russia
@@ДианаВоробец-з2о To be exact, Russia wants to claim the history of Rus))) While Ukraine has the capital of Rus - Kyiv, the money of Rus - hryvnia, and the symbol of Rus - trydent (tryzub).
@@_vital_p Мы ведь можем говорить не по английски, верно? Каким образом Россия "ХоЧит укРастЬ истОрИЮ рУСИ"? Династия с момента основания Руси и до создания Русского Царства - Одна. Это были Рюриковичи. И к тому же была одна религия - православие. Русины, Русские, Русы, Рутены и пр. пр писания - это все синонимы. Если вы отсчитываете свою историю от захвата юго-западных земель Литвой, то это позорище. Русы были там холопами, там даже и речь не шла о каком то равном отношении к бывшему населению Руси. И страна эта была КАТОЛИЧЕСКОЙ. По этому да, Руская история это история России, история, в которой последняя отстояла право на свою независимость и построила огромное государство
#BradHartliep, of Royal Blood, descended from the #Viking #Kings of #Rus and #Kiev, descended from #Tsars of the #Rus and the #Romanov, the only Rightful #President and #Tsar of #Russia, and the only #Tsar who can #SaveRussia and #Restore the #RussianEmpire .. #TsarBrad, #KingOfRussia
some people do not understand that such a comment supports the occupation of the territory of Ukraine by the Russians and the death of hundreds of thousands of people
It is disappointing how Western videos about Russian history fall short when it comes to Ivan the Formidable. They completely butcher the history of his rule and even present myths as historical facts.
@@legslutor1172 в каком контексте? Вы лекцию прочитать хотите о том, как царь использовал прослойку более бедных бояр/дворян (которая и стала опричниной) в борьбе с богатыми? ))
@@Mike1zKool yes that's why i say norse and viking,bcoz i was think norse for all north tribes not for vikings 👍anyway all ancient mythologies sharing alot of similar things almost same ideas and gods with different names
Russian textbooks give the year 1147 and say Moscow was founded by Prince Yuri Dolgoruky. Sure as hell, there is a Yuri Dolgoruky statue in Moscow. In reality the year 1147 is the first mention of Moscow in Russian chronicles. Yuri Dolgoruky, Prince of Vladimir and Suzdal, invited his ally Svyatoslav, Prince of Novgorod-Seversk, to come visit him in Moscow. “Come to me, my brother, to Moskov” - Yuri wrote him. What can we infer from this phrase? Evidently, Moscow was important enough to be known to Svyatoslav without further indications and to serve as a meeting place for two important allies. We can be quite sure it was founded before 1147. Unfortunately, we will probably never know who did it (Yuri or one of his predecessors) and when exactly. But we can say what was the role of Moscow in 12th century. In 12th century, Rus’ disintegrated into a number of principalities. The princes started to fight each other for the control of Kiev, because the Prince of Kiev was considered the overlord. As a result, Kiev was regularly devastated by various Russian princes. Four centres of power emerged: Galich, Chernigov, Smolensk and Vladimir-Suzdal . The bloody war of 1146-1154 opposed two alliances. Yuri Dolgoruky was the leader of one of them. Yuri’s allies are (Vladimir-Suzdal, Novgorod-Seversk, Galich, Old Prussians and Polovtsi). His enemies are (Smolensk, Chernigov, Ryazan, Volhynia, Poland and Hungary).Moscow was a strategic fortress on the border of Yuri Dolgoruky’s lands facing three enemy principalities at the same time. No wonder he choose Moscow to welcome his ally. No one, of course, could imagine the future of this border fortress. Yuri Dolgoruky would laugh a lot if they told him that the posterity remembers him almost exclusively as the founder of Moscow.
There was no such thing as "russia" 😂 Anyone in Kyivan Rus' would laugh their ass of if they knew there's some eastern finno ugric country tries to steal this name 🤦🤣
I love how Yaroslav’s solution to a fratricidal war was dividing the state, which would lead to more fratricidal wars. So much for Yaroslav the “Wise”.
Popularly called The Golden Horde, the domains of the heirs of Jochi were not known by that name. The term ‘Golden Horde’ does not enter the sources until the sixteenth century, when Russian chroniclers referred to the domains as Zolotaia Orda, the Golden Camp or Palace.¹ During the Mongol era, they were known as the Kipchak Ulus or Khanate or the Jochid Ulus or Khanate. The Kipchak Khanate appellation came later and was a substitution for the Dasht-i Kipchak, or the Kipchak Steppes. May, Timothy. “The Jochid Ulus or Golden Horde.” The Mongol Empire, Edinburgh University Press, 2018, pp. 280-314,
Ulus Juchi was part of Golden Horde. This name was deleted by moscovian officials when they try to argue their claims on old Rus' in 17-18th centuries. Later they officially steal the name "Russia" from Ukraine (1721). Actually modern Russian Federation has wery few connections to old medieval Rus' politically and culturally. It's typical post Mongol Khanate (state) with strong cultural and ethnic influence of ancient finnish tribes.
There is no achievement. All this territory was conquered by Tatars. However Golden Horde(the Tatar's empire) had a war against tamerlan/timur and as a result Golden Horde was broken into several bleeding out Kaghanates(states). However tamerlan did not touch russians and as a result after several cenruties this allowed russians to occupy Tatar's lands. But russians never built a state and now russia under go the third wave of breaking up so as a result soon you will see russia totally crushed.
On video the false history of origin of Russia is presented. Inhabitants of Ladoga have invited Rurik who with great probability was Russ on roots, but lived in area of Scandinavia as there are even evidences that on Germanic Lands lived settlements with Russ that is confirmed by archeological finds. Now about other facts: 1. The state "Kievan Rus" never existed. This fictitious name has been entered into the use by the Soviet historians within the limits of policy of derusification of Russian history. Rus (Russia) only according to Byzantine sources existed already in the 9th century, but Kiev at that time worked for the Khazars. 2. The first capital of Russia Ladoga was founded by Slovenes ca. 700 г. 3. In the conclusion of the contract with Rurik participated Slavic tribes Slovene and Krivichi and Finnish tribes Chud and Merja (according to the Novgorod I Chronicle) or all (according to the Tale of Bygone Years). 4 From cities of initial, Rurik's, Russia (Ladoga, Novgorod, Izborsk, Beloozero, Rostov, Murom, Polotsk) 6 are in Russia, 1 - in Byelorussia, in Ukraine - none. 5. Askold, Dir, Oleg, Igor, Svyatoslav, Vladimir and Yaroslav came from Ladoga or Novgorod and conquered Kiev by force. There were no cases of conquest in the opposite direction. 6. Before the conquest of Russia, Kiev was a Khazar city. Its earliest documentary mention is in the "Kiev Jewish letter" of the beginning of the tenth century in the expression "kagal of Kiev". 7. The words "Se budi mati city Russkymi", which the annals attribute to Oleg, mean the proclamation of Kiev as the main city of Rus, and not the origin of Rus from Kiev. 8. Kiev had a Turkic name - Mankerman. 9.Kiev was on southern border of Russia with Turkic lands.The geographical center of Russia was between Smolensk and Moscow. 10.The army of Prince Oleg, with which he conquered Kiev, included Varangians, Slovenes, Krivichi, Chud, Merja and all.After conquering Kiev, Oleg imposed a tribute on its population in favor of the Slovenes, Krivichi and Meri.
And, dear Ukrainians, whether you like it or not, the official date of the founding of Novgorod is considered to be 859, according to the first mention of the city in the late Nikon Chronicle (XVI century). In the Tale of Bygone Years, created in the 12th century, the city was first mentioned in 862. This is exactly the case in all official sources. Yes, the Novgorod that we see now was rebuilt later, according to various historical research. But again, it is known that before this there was a settlement on the Rurik Settlement, a little upstream of the Volkhov and closer to Lake Ilmen. Also, there is a theory that there was a settlement in the Peryn area, as evidenced by various archaeological finds from 5-8 centuries from different cultures, which suggests that even then trade was carried out on these lands
@@dddo3706 Kyiv was first mentioned in documents in 915, Novgorod in 859. What's the question? If we take all sorts of myths and legends as a source, then both cities are older, but we are talking about official sources and documents, right?
By the archeology, Novgorod was found in the second half of X century. The man in XII century simply couldn't know about dates in IX century. @@VerRoKka
@@VerRoKka official?) there are no official documents 😂 or you mean primary chronicle is official document😂? Yeah sure. Find me any proof that Rurik existed. Then must be Kyi too. And Santa clause 🤣. And by the way if you open any encyclopedia it's says Kyiv founded in 482. So yes, Kyiv is older than Novgorod 😊
Its very important. Please translate: Я недавно был в россии. И так, что удалось выяснить по России и русским: - Что меня удивило.... Русские сознательно отказываются от благ цивилизации. И бравируют этим. Они прямо в лицо говорят, что мне не нужен ваш мерседес, я хочу ездить на машине отечественного производства. А интернет мы свой построим. - всю жизнь русских держали в скотском состоянии. И вдруг появилось окно возможностей ярко прожить последние 5-10 дней и умереть в окопе в кругу побратимов. Поэтому они еще долго будут идти убивать. Эта самая большая беда для Украины. И главная мотивация русских. Это необходимо понимать. - русские искренне хотят стереть американцев с лица Земли и радуются их любой неудаче. - русские мечтают дойти до пролива Ла-Манш - Русские хотят уничтожить украинцев. Вначале войны они говорили что хотят просто проучить, как старший брат наказать младшего за непослушание. Теперь русские собираются воевать до тех пор, пока Украина не перестанет быть пригодной для жизни. Возможны временные передышки для набора сил. - Путин был обычным вором. Императором его сделал русский народ, а не пропаганда. - Сегодня русские недовольны только тем, что Путин до сих пор не применил ядерное оружие. - Даже если Украина освободит все свои территории война не закончится. Решить проблему можно только развалом России, чтобы понизить градус имперского величия. Факт - в Европе не понимают на сколько велик этот градус. - Русские готовы терпеть десятки лет любые лишения (ЛЮБЫЕ), лишь бы Украина жила плохо. - Усиление сепаратистских настроений внутри России не приведет к результату. Даже в национальных республиках имперское величие на первом месте. Например в той же Башкирии массам плевать на национальную идентичность. Да и в Казани то же. На митинги они идут только потому что хотят на время почувствовать себя людьми. Но чего то серьезного от них не ждите. - во все времена, всякого рода иностранных авантюристов привлекала Россия. Много ли сегодня таких компаний, которые готовы поставлять в русский Рейх любые товары? ДЕСЯТКИ ТЫСЯЧ. И что прикажете с этим делать? - Запад верит, что русские хотят свободы. Это не просто ошибочное суждение. Это опасное заблуждение. Ответственно заявляю, что подавляющее большинство не хотят. - в США люди живут в стереотипах и мифах о "хорошем народе" и плохом президенте, романтизируя русскую культуру и не понимая, что русская культура - это ФАСАД, за которым скрываются потемкинские деревни. - В США не понимают, что государства Россия уже нет, есть криминальные группировки, которые делят воровской "общаг" и у которых в собственности около 100 000 000 поголовья скота. - Русские не могут дать ничего этому миру. Поэтому ни хотят его уничтожить - Жены мобилизованных играют не последнюю роль, мотивируя своих свинособак пойти на войну и сдохнуть в окопе. "Ты что не мужик"? - похрюкивают свиноматки. - Не Путин убивал украинцев в Буче, Гостомеле, Ирпени, Мариуполе, а простые руские работяги, которых оправдывдывает русская оппозиция, сбежавшая на Запад и морочащая вам головы. Все независимые опросы подтверждают что русские поддерживают войну в Украине. Все - от детей средних классов до старых советских пенсионеров. Не из страха поддеерживают. Искренне поддерживают и всегда эб этом мечтали. Руссские улыбаются когда очередная ракета попадает в жилой дом в Украине. - Русский - это не национальнсть, это состояние души абсолютного раба, готового исполнить любые преступные приказы. В любой стране есть люди с подобной ментальностью, скажете вы. Да. Только в России их не 8-12%, как в цивилизованных странах, а 85-89%. - Оппозиция любит говорить что выборы в России были нечестными. Да, но если бы они были честными, то Путин набрал бы не меньше 75%. Он бы потерял голоса тех избирателей, которые считают Путина достаточно мягким.
Really looking forward to see what author has to say about Southern part of Rus. Also there is so much missing information about Cossacs autonomy, who they were and how they really influenced history of neighboring states.
@@ericingefara4179 The word Cossack itself is of non-Slavic origin and most likely has a Khazar origin, not a Turkic one. Cossacks were a separate phenomenon in the south of Russia and adopted many of the practices of nomadic tribes, and in some part they themselves consisted of descendants and people of non-Slavic origin. In general, Ukrainians did not exist at all before.
@@ruldali615 я это знаю) казаки - это ославянившиеся потомки азиатских кочевых племен, это не секрет. Вся их культура - от полукочевого образа жизни и до элементов одежды - осталась с тех времён, когда они были половцами, татарами и печенегами
@@ruldali615 word Cosaacs is given to UKRANIAN people by Khasars or Tatars and mining free person. Because they indeed free runaways from both polish Lithonian commonwealth as well dictatorship of Russias kings. They spoke UKRAINIAN language, had UKRAINIAN schools, and even universities. First constitution in Europe was Pilip Orlik cossacs constitution.
Many slaves from Eastern Europe rose to high office as slave officials in Byzantium and in the Ottoman empire . Others became soldiers , workers and artisans . Many Slavic women became concubines . Nomads from Central Asia regularly raided Slavic areas for slaves until states developed .
I wish there was a larger picture of history... something putting larger context & scale to the European/Asian map... The Mongol Empire The English colonial Empire Alexander the Great Napoleon The Roman Empire The Byzantine Empire This History segment show small portions of the tapestry that is History. I'd love to see one that puts all of the major players in color at once... calling back to details described in greater clarity in this videos. Anyone else want to see the Mongol Empire & Alexander the Great's campaign displayed to the same scale...?
let's not forget the Hungarians ... who took part in the founding of Kievian Rus .... by / ÁLMOS /a "Sleepy" leader .... Hungarians played a crucial role in this. ....
This is interesting. I feel the question on the "Origin of Things", especially life is pointless, and with history is challenging as we don't know but tend to speculate, especially further back we go. What is useful are the ruins that people built with might and power, way more then us. However, they got ruined because they wrong themselves. We are no invincible as they decay is obvious. Man learned anything form history? Yes, but never heed!
For 30 years, the Russian Federation used the new technologies of the West for its militarization. The prolongation of the war and the gradual capture of new territories strengthens the idea of "Great Russia" in the hearts of Russians. The idea of "great Russia" will forever supplant the idea of the truth of Western values of tolerance and new technologies, without satellite-corrected point strikes on the locations of Russian troops, there will be no victory for the Western countries. This is not 1918, there will be no revenge in 100 years.
Country with the name - Muscovy, Tsar Peter renamed "Russia" only in the 18th century, in 1721. The Moksha tribe named their river Moscow, and the translation of this name, from the language of Moksha, sounds like “dirty water”. Any other languages of the world cannot translate the word Moscow. The word “kremlin” is Tatar and means fortifications on a hill. In the Middle Ages, all the cartographers of Europe wrote and drew the border of Europe along the borders of Rus (Rus is the territory of present-day Ukraine). Muscovy - the ulus, with its Finnish peoples, has always been a component of the Horde, and Europe rightly attributed it to Asia.
let's not forget the Hungarians ... who took part in the founding of Kievian Rus .... by / ÁLMOS /a "Sleepy" leader .... Hungarians played a crucial role in this. ....
Tatar, also spelled Tartar, any member of several Turkic-speaking peoples that collectively numbered more than 5 million in the late 20th century and lived mainly in west-central Russia along the central course of the Volga River and its tributary, the Kama, and thence east to the Ural Mountains. The Tatars are also settled in Kazakhstan and, to a lesser extent, in western Siberia.
Враньё, слово Царь было ещё в Китае, так раньше более 4 тысячи лет назад называли себя императоры. Потом это слово перешло на запад. А так как русский народ древнее западных, поэтому оно у нас появилось раньше, чем у запада. Цезарь и Царь разные слова
Palaiologos family, our last Greek kings. The bloodline ended with them. The remaining, the last Komninos fled to Corsica when dirty Ottomans were hunting down every last royal bloodline. Komninos took the name Kalimeris in Corsica to avoid being spotted. There's a strong theory which says he married a Corsican woman, and they produced Napoleon Bonaparte. The word "Kalimeris" in Greek literally means "Buonaparte" translated in Italian. We will never know for sure, though. What we do know is, Napoleon was fond of the Greeks. He was sleeping with Arrian's book at his head, Alexander the Great's biography. When Napoleon later requested a small patch of forestry land from Greece, Greeks replied "No". Napoleon wasn't eager to retaliate. It reinforces the idea he might knew that perhaps he was half-Greek himself.
@Максимъ Остапенко суть не меняет , что это не от Цезаря пошло, а уже давно цари есть и ни кто не знает достоверность истории, если даже сейчас видим, что каждый свой пишет, а история народов живущих на русских землях более 8 тысяч лет из-за дат памятников и пирамид, с которыми можем сами в живую ознакомиться, как и с подземными городами и проходами в нашей стране. А также глядя на это и куча факторов, видим, что история официальная лживая, написана на коленки, как и про космос сказка для тупых, люди на этих сказках зарабатывают деньги))
5:51 The Bolghar people are not Bulgarians. They're Bulgars, they are another state that splintered from the dissolution of Great Old Bulgaria. However, the Bulgars that arrived at the Danube and what then became Bulgaria are not the same people. The Bulgars were the ruling minority in a country predominantly settled by Greeks, Slavs, Thracians, etc., and with time due to intermixing the line was blurred at some point and the minorities got absorbed into the vast Slav majority. However, the Volga Bulgars were just that, Bulgars. Not Bulgarians.
there are many things that are simplified, under-discussed or erroneous. Rooss is more fragmented than it was shown on the map, there were tribes and cities to hell, this is not considering the nomads. Novgorod most likely already existed, but was captured by the Normans, in the records of Byzantium they appear as areas from which raids took place. Kiev was conquered by the Ruriks from relatives. Local princes were elected according to the Norman format. Everyone is simplifying that there was originally a monarchy. Byzantium and the dynasty could have tried to erase pagan history. According to the stone buildings, degradation can be traced after baptism. Lithuanian Orthodoxy was largely secured by the territories captured from Russia, their later reconquest was further secured by the subsequent uprisings. It can be assumed that the campaign of Ermak had parallels with the campaign of Cortes, local tribes, already erased in history, were terrorized by the Tatars. They easily obeyed, but Kuchum's troops were constantly stuck on the border and waiting for the Cossacks to withdraw. If we compare Ivan's madness with European kings, then he will act like an angel here..
@@Ne0LiT maybe in English I make mistake, but I'm Krim-Tatar turkish and I'm understanding in Turkish, in Kazakhstan, in AzerbaijanTurkish, in Turkmens, in Tatars, Bulgars, Uyghurs,.....
What an amazing information tool it should be instilled in every school for a number of different cultures I find it hard to believe that nobody has ever suggested this or that this is not something that is attempted to be implemented in the school systems. Although I do actually know why that would not be the case it's just a shame that it is what it is.
Unfortuantely, this video is filled with historically-incorrect information. You can see many issues with it being pointed-out in the comments. Here's one point I've pointed out: Oleg didn't 'found the Kievan Rus', and Kievan Rus isn't a historical term. It's a term that was created by 18th-century Russian historians to refer to the part of Russia's history that was centred around Kiev. In its day, what's today often called "Kievan Rus" was instead called "the lands of Rus", which means "the lands of Russia" - "Russia" being the latin phrasing of Rus. And the kingdom that's being called "Kievan Rus" didn't originate and wasn't founded in Kiev, but began in Novgorod, which was the first capital of that kingdom. When Oleg conquered Kiev, he didn't create a new kingdom, but expanded the lands of Rus to include Kiev. And then he moved Rus' captial from Novgorod to Kiev. The conquering and capitalising of Kiev wasn't the founding of Oleg's kingdom or a historical state, it was the expanding of one that already existed. "Kievan Rus" is a later abstraction of a historical time-period, and isn't a kingdom or a physical thing. So, saying that Oleg founded something that's an abstraction is a pretty ignorant, ahistorical claim.
@@thischannel1071 Actually it was other way around. Term "Kieven Rus" was used actually by non-Russian shoolars in Russia, to distinguish part what was shared between them and other East Slavs. If it would be just Russian history, then there would be no point in adding that. And no, it doesn't mean land of "Russia". It mean, land of Rus so basically land of oar people. In reference to Swed's who created they principles there, trading with Constantinople (at the same time Wends around Vistula, created powerful tribal union). Initially Swed's created Novgorod, what was later part of Hanseatic League and sized large Fino-Ugric lands. And later captured Kviv from Khazar's, what become new capital. Moscow wasn't founded until 12'th century, shortly after that Rus fall to Mongol invasion. Ending Nordic presence in the region. From that point majority of Rus land is sized by Lithuania, what later become part of powerful union with West Slavs. While Golden Orde control treacherous Moscow as puppet state, who become rich enforcing tributes in name of Khan. Some time later they lead to collapse to of Novgorod and size they vast Fino-Ugric lands. Around same time Golden Orde also collapse and is subjugated by they vassals. In 16'th century, Ivan the Terrible self proclaim himself as ruler of all "Ruxians" what ever it mean? What lead to his conflict with Polish-Lithuania Commonwealth. Who actually were also rulers of majority of Rus people (in so called Cossac Ukraine). In the end Tzardom (title also stolen from Bulgaria, as Moscow never did have contact with Byzantium, fighting with Ottomans for token part of they land. So Crimea) is defeated and Moscow is taken. Unfortunately German prince from Oldenberg family is elected as new Tzar and after defeat of Poland, abomination known as Russian Empire is formed. Some time later head of rouge Polish state of Prussia become Emperor of Holly Roman Empire and Habsburgs also spread like wildfire. As result of alliance between German nobility (at the same time Prussian princess Catherine II the Great become Tzar). Democratic Commonwealth is defeated and tear apart (after Saxons, who competed with Prussians, lost control over the realm). Rest of history is more known.
@@TheRezro Again, what I wrote is correct - the term Kievan Rus' was coined by Russian historians. The history of Russia, which includes the history of Rus, involves many peoples. The term Kievan Rus' was not about identifying territory of specific ethnic groups, but about identifying the territory included in the political entity that was under Rus / Russian rule. Regarding this: "And no, it doesn't mean land of "Russia". It mean, land of Rus so basically land of oar people." You're saying that "lands of Rus" means lands of Rus. But a phrase doesn't mean itself - it is itself. What a phrase or word means is what it's equivalent to. Russia is the Latin phrasing of Rus, and so "lands of Rus" and "lands of Russia" are the equivalent phrase, and one means the other. The word Rus, and therefore Russia in Latin, means "people who row". So, you can say that "lands of Rus" means both "lands of Russia" and "lands of people who row", because the phrase "lands of Rus" is equivalent to either. For the point of my post, I was showing the connection between Rus and Russia, that they're the same word just in two different languages, and why Russia has -sia added.
@@thischannel1071 Except Russians didn't exactly rule Rus people. Whole thing was mostly Imperialist projection of Ivan the Tribe, later fallowed by German Tzars. It is why claiming history of Rus as "Russian" is plain wrong. Russians being bastard child of Slavs and Mongols, try ethnically cleans other Rus people (and Slavs in general). It is why your argument doesn't really make sense. Kieven was added to distinguish historically different center then Muscovy. That all about it.
@@thischannel1071 You must clearly understand that the first sloltsa of Rus' is the Ladoga region and the ancient city of Ladoga (but this is closer to the settlement of the Vikings who lived where there were trade routes by water) Then the capital became Novgorod. Rus' came from it. and then Kyiv was crowned Prince of Novgorod. Overlay maps in Photoshop and don’t lie to others, the northern part of Russia is Rus. The word rus is not the Greek word Rus (this is a river, river bed or rowers from Gothic). Russia is the Greek style of the name of Rus'. The Greek Church influenced Rus'.
@@Arkturbettel Thank you, but i am referring to 5:11, in which time there was no Livonian state (nor any state in that regard). Actually, there never was a Livonian state either, but a mix of different states ruled by bishops and Teutonic Order.
I love seeing borders moving.
Ps: ok it is really moving now...
Borders are actually the weakest part of these series.
Same
@@MateoF Sure, I can. What I mean about the borders being the "weakest part" is that they were clearly drawn without any attention to details or without trying to trace them from the original maps. This creates a sense of "border gore", because they are drawn like no borders ever would be, and clearly not like they were actually looking like. That makes them look rather inaccurate and kind of like a doodle, not like a map and it is clear they were drawn by the eye and not traced or anything. That just makes them look really bad, especially when you are already used to how Grand Duchy of Lithuania or Poland were supposed to look like. Sometimes they can be a bit historically inaccurate as well. Like, don't get me wrong, they are still not terrible, and the plot and the historical knowledge and voiceover are really good and that's why I'm watching these, but borders are just something I have to cringe through and hope they won't make me cringe too much. I hope you don't mind.
@@Altermerea agreed
Me too lmao
Rurik not founded Novgorod,Novgorod already was by that time.Rurik was invited to rule on Novgorod
yes, just like Smolesnk. Official date is 863 according to annals, but archeology says 3rd or 4th century
Именно с именем князя Рюрика связано первое упоминание о Новгороде в летописи 859 года: "И принял всю власть один Рюрик, и пришел к Ильменю, и срубил городок под Волхвом, и назвал его Новгород, и сел тут княжить, раздавать волости и города рубить"
@@algalkin Таких летописей нет,летописи появились лет через 300 и информация была там искажённая.Тем более вставляли чтобы узаконить права Киева и Рюриковичей на Новгород.Здесь только архиологии может помочь.А она говорит что Новгород был до Рюрика.
@@rusgercin9630 да археология как бы говорит, что Новгород в современном месте был основан даже позже этой даты, а именно в 930 году. То есть летопись ещё его "старит". Было, конечно, "Рюриково Городище", но это не совсем Новгород и там тоже непонятно.
@@ddd7386 Ну в любом случае по летописи ориентироваться. Можно только в общих чертах, так как кто такой Рюрик , уже сказать даже тогда не могли, а когда и кто кого основал тоже самое.Остается только догадываться.
Shooting the ashes of the false Tsar out of a cannon in the direction of the country that supported him is one of the most Russian things imaginable 😄
Why ashes not whole body?
@@takasmaka820 the whole body couldn't fit in a cannon, so they chopped him first and then burned as he was stinking.
Poles had been doing this too in that time.
With a little-known historical fact today that the basis of the Slavic population of Moscow are the ancient tribes of the Vyatichs, who according to the Russian chronicle are the Lyakhs... In fact, one nation that was divided by religion, some became Catholic Poles, others became Orthodox Russians. Vyatichi: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vyatichi
@@rodjarrow6575
Many Slavic tribes participated in the formation of RUSSIA, including the Polyan tribe. it was this tribe that became the center of the formation of Poland. also, the association of Slavic tribes that formed Russia included such tribes as the White Croats and Ilmen Slovenes (the area of Veliky Novgorod), and there were two dozen Slavic tribes united in Russia, plus or minus, the same association included Finnish and Turkic tribes, in the 15th-16th century Siberian tribes were also joined
Recommended after putin interview
There Are also myths
Хах, это точно
Mind ya business😂😂
Rus' is not Russia
@stantheman276So basically your argument is that a bunch of people instead of selecting their own leaders, chose to select a foreigner and then hail his line as the line of royalty and as Prince, literally going against nearly every known case of tribe selecting leaders in the world at that time.
Nice try, buddy.
i find the history of eastern europe and the baltic area very interesting, because it's something we never learn in school in italy
In the United States we don't learn about any out of country history besides World War II.
@@RickFoxChicken And even that is a Iie. Revizioned history where "USA" singIe handedIy defeated nzis.
But in fact, 80% of fighting was done by Soviets.
Reasonably so. Eastern European history is a mess of names of rulers significant towns and areas, dates of fights, of election of new ruler, of the downfall of empires, of revolutions etc.
It's not history that a child can meaningfuly keep up with. In Greece we did learn a tiny amount of Lithuanian Polish empire, the Kievan Rus, the Mongols and Tartars and the Vikings of the north etc. Yet none will remember they were even taught any of these.
It's interesting to me that both Western Europe and Eastern Europe were significantly influenced by the two halves of the Roman Empire. The West dominated by Roman Catholicism while the East dominated by Constantinople's Orthodoxy.
@@zippyparakeet1074 yeah so many things in East and Western Europe come from Rome is very fascinating.
Plot twist: russians are vikings who didn't like boats
Actually they like boats But only on rivers .
Those were the goths
Actually goths visigoths were timelines to late 4th century to 800s .
russians have nothing to do with the vikings. russians (ethnic nationality) are slavs and vikings are normans
@@joedoe9208 you missed the joke
It was never called "Kievan Rus" until 18th century. Russian historians retroactively named it that.
You're right they were called Rus
Russian historians simply designated the time period "Kievan Rus" to separate this period from the period of "feudal fragmentation", after which Rus' forever became Muscovite.
@@ilyapangorchav nope.
@@gunterodim1535 it is a mislabelling is what I'm saying.
Oh then what were they called mr apollo?@@apollo5261 Cause the Russian empire existed since the 16th century and they were the Rus state before that. I dearly hope you wont call it Ukraine because that didnt exist since 1917
Oleg didn't 'found the Kievan Rus'. Kievan Rus isn't a historical term, it's one created by 19th-century Russian historians to refer to the part of Russia's history that was centred around Kiev. In its day, Kievan Rus' was just called "the lands of Rus", which means "the lands of Russia" - "Russia" is the Greek phrasing of Rus. And what's retroactively called "Kievan Rus" didn't originate and wasn't founded in Kiev, but began in Novgorod, which was the first capital of "Kievan Rus". When Oleg conquered Kiev, he expanded the lands of Rus' to include Kiev, and then he moved Rus' captial from Novgorod to Kiev. The conquering and capitalising of Kiev wasn't the founding of Oleg's kingdom or a historical state, it was the expanding of one that already existed.
Додик, Новгород не являлся Русью вовсе, и по археологическим данным основан не ранее 930 года, Киев на несколько веков старше Новгорода.
_Садись,два_
I can't see the previous comment to reply to it directly, for some reason, but that comment is wrong. Rus' is the name of the tribe which then became the Rus' kingdom with its capital in Novgorod, and which later moved its capital to Kiev in 882. Kiev is older than Novgorod, but Rus' didn't originate in Kiev, and the pre-Rus' Kiev has nothing to do with Russia or Ukraine. Kiev being older than Novgorod really has no relevance to this discussion.
The Rus' tribe also predates Novgorod, and they lived in regions further east of Novgorod, though they first formed a state with Novgorod as its capital: "The two original centres of Rus' were Staraja Ladoga and Rurikovo Gorodishche, two points on the Volkhov, a river running for 200 km between Lake Ilmen in the south to Lake Ladoga in the north."
"According to the first Russian annals, the Primary Chronicle, Rurik was a Scandinavian "from the tribe of the Rus" whom the people of Novgorod invited in 862 to assume rule over them, as they had been unable to govern themselves. Accompanied by his family and retinue, Rurik settled in Novgorod, and his brothers took control of adjacent regions. The area under their authority came to be called "the land of the Rus" and eventually Rus'. The descendants of Rurik continued to rule over this region following his death about 873."
@@__Ruslan_Nedokolenko__ Quoted from the OP:
I can't see the previous comment to reply to it directly, for some reason, but that comment is wrong. Rus' is the name of the tribe which then became the Rus' kingdom with its capital in Novgorod, and which later moved its capital to Kiev in 882. Kiev is older than Novgorod, but Rus' didn't originate in Kiev, and the pre-Rus' Kiev has nothing to do with Russia or Ukraine. Kiev being older than Novgorod really has no relevance to this discussion.
The Rus' tribe also predates Novgorod, and they lived in regions further east of Novgorod, though they first formed a state with Novgorod as its capital: "The two original centres of Rus' were Staraja Ladoga and Rurikovo Gorodishche, two points on the Volkhov, a river running for 200 km between Lake Ilmen in the south to Lake Ladoga in the north."
"According to the first Russian annals, the Primary Chronicle, Rurik was a Scandinavian "from the tribe of the Rus" whom the people of Novgorod invited in 862 to assume rule over them, as they had been unable to govern themselves. Accompanied by his family and retinue, Rurik settled in Novgorod, and his brothers took control of adjacent regions. The area under their authority came to be called "the land of the Rus" and eventually Rus'. The descendants of Rurik continued to rule over this region following his death about 873."
@@thischannel1071 Про Рюрика мы знаем из летописей написанных Нестором через столетия после описываемых им событий. Кроме этого упоминания, нет никаких других источников. Рюрик это легендарная личность. По археологическим данным, культурный слой ранее X века в Новгороде не обнаружен, но легендарный Рюрик, каким то образом, там смог появиться в IX. Никто из киевских князей в летописях не упоминается как Рюрикович.
По летописям, Русь локализуется как Киев, Чернигов, Переяслав...
Новгородцы не являются русинами - они новгородцы, и никак иначе. В летописи за 1141 год читаем: "А когда Святослав (Ольгович) удирал из Новгорода в Русь к брату, то послал Всеволод навстречу ему". То есть, Новгород, не является Русью.
@@thischannel1071 (translated by app)
We know about Rurik from the chronicles written by Nestor centuries after the events he describes. Apart from this mention, there are no other sources. Rurik is a legendary person. According to archaeological data, no cultural layer earlier than the 10th century was found in Novgorod, but the legendary Rurik, somehow, could appear there in |X. None of the Kievan princes is mentioned in the annals as Rurikovich. According to the annals, Rus' is localized as Kyiv, Chernigov, Pereyaslav... Novgorodians are not Rusyns - they are Novgorodians, and nothing else. In the annals for 1141 we read: “And when Svyatoslav (Olgovich) fled from Novgorod to Rus' to his brother, Vsevolod sent to meet him.” That is, Novgorod is not Rus.
Me : "Oh nice a new video"
*"The impostor"*
Me : "Oh"
uh oh
GET OUT OF MY HEAD GET OUT OF MY HEAD GET OUT OF MY HEAD GET OUT OF MY HEAD GET OUT OF MY HEAD GET OUT OF MY HEAD GET OUT OF MY HEAD GET OUT OF MY HEAD
that's a bit sussy
When the Tsar is sus
amogus
East slavic tribes -Kryvich, vyatich, drevlyane existed long before Ryurik. They had their own Kings, localized fights between each other , eventually mingled and united starting Russian nation. Ryurik was invited by people of Novgorod.
Rurik was proven a made up legend, not historical fact. DNA tests of Rurikid dynasty bodies were made, they had indeed scandinavian ancestry, but from 11th century, not 9th.
There was nothing "russian" about them. Russian nationality formed much, much later.
@@imaginarystranger1974
Specially for alternative Ukrainians.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Millennium_of_Russia
@@musckowit A monument from1859 year. 😅😅😅😅
@@sirenka9192
What amuses you so much?
The only forces better then the winter:
- Mongol
- Poland
lithuania too,
its kind of weird not including it
@@windex1613 LITHUANIA STRONG 🇱🇹💪🇱🇹💪🇱🇹💪🇱🇹💪🇱🇹💪🇱🇹💪🇱🇹💪🇱🇹💪🇱🇹💪🇱🇹💪🇱🇹💪🇱🇹💪🇱🇹💪🇱🇹💪🇱🇹💪🇱🇹💪🇱🇹💪🇱🇹💪🇱🇹💪🇱🇹💪🇱🇹💪🇱🇹💪🇱🇹💪🇱🇹💪🇱🇹💪🇱🇹💪🇱🇹💪🇱🇹💪🇱🇹💪
@@Gvazdika. It’s always nice seeing people who really are proud of their country
@@Gvazdika. Oh fuck sorry Lithuania too
@@marshmallowenthusiast9032 i was being satire but i am proud of my nation but it does have its own problems like population loss
This is by far the best ancient history documentary I've seen. The narration and visuals are simply perfect.
So this is what the Meet Arnold guy is doing now?
isnt that riddle?
Yeah
@@PeterTremor riddle is a channel which is also the meet arnold guy
I guess so , i miss the old one
@@andrade4630 My friend Google is not opening, I need help. Can you tell me where the Turks live, the names of a few Turkish empires and a few modern Turkish states?
"so it's all trade routes?"
"Always have been"
China noises in the back...
Its very important. Please translate:
Я недавно был в россии.
И так, что удалось выяснить по России и русским:
- Что меня удивило.... Русские сознательно отказываются от благ цивилизации. И бравируют этим. Они прямо в лицо говорят, что мне не нужен ваш мерседес, я хочу ездить на машине отечественного производства. А интернет мы свой построим.
- всю жизнь русских держали в скотском состоянии. И вдруг появилось окно возможностей ярко прожить последние 5-10 дней и умереть в окопе в кругу побратимов. Поэтому они еще долго будут идти убивать. Эта самая большая беда для Украины. И главная мотивация русских. Это необходимо понимать.
- русские искренне хотят стереть американцев с лица Земли и радуются их любой неудаче.
- русские мечтают дойти до пролива Ла-Манш
- Русские хотят уничтожить украинцев. Вначале войны они говорили что хотят просто проучить, как старший брат наказать младшего за непослушание. Теперь русские собираются воевать до тех пор, пока Украина не перестанет быть пригодной для жизни. Возможны временные передышки для набора сил.
- Путин был обычным вором. Императором его сделал русский народ, а не пропаганда.
- Сегодня русские недовольны только тем, что Путин до сих пор не применил ядерное оружие.
- Даже если Украина освободит все свои территории война не закончится. Решить проблему можно только развалом России, чтобы понизить градус имперского величия. Факт - в Европе не понимают на сколько велик этот градус.
- Русские готовы терпеть десятки лет любые лишения (ЛЮБЫЕ), лишь бы Украина жила плохо.
- Усиление сепаратистских настроений внутри России не приведет к результату. Даже в национальных республиках имперское величие на первом месте. Например в той же Башкирии массам плевать на национальную идентичность. Да и в Казани то же. На митинги они идут только потому что хотят на время почувствовать себя людьми. Но чего то серьезного от них не ждите.
- во все времена, всякого рода иностранных авантюристов привлекала Россия. Много ли сегодня таких компаний, которые готовы поставлять в русский Рейх любые товары? ДЕСЯТКИ ТЫСЯЧ. И что прикажете с этим делать?
- Запад верит, что русские хотят свободы. Это не просто ошибочное суждение. Это опасное заблуждение. Ответственно заявляю, что подавляющее большинство не хотят.
- в США люди живут в стереотипах и мифах о "хорошем народе" и плохом президенте, романтизируя русскую культуру и не понимая, что русская культура - это ФАСАД, за которым скрываются потемкинские деревни.
- В США не понимают, что государства Россия уже нет, есть криминальные группировки, которые делят воровской "общаг" и у которых в собственности около 100 000 000 поголовья скота.
- Русские не могут дать ничего этому миру. Поэтому ни хотят его уничтожить
- Жены мобилизованных играют не последнюю роль, мотивируя своих свинособак пойти на войну и сдохнуть в окопе. "Ты что не мужик"? - похрюкивают свиноматки.
- Не Путин убивал украинцев в Буче, Гостомеле, Ирпени, Мариуполе, а простые руские работяги, которых оправдывдывает русская оппозиция, сбежавшая на Запад и морочащая вам головы. Все независимые опросы подтверждают что русские поддерживают войну в Украине. Все - от детей средних классов до старых советских пенсионеров. Не из страха поддеерживают. Искренне поддерживают и всегда эб этом мечтали. Руссские улыбаются когда очередная ракета попадает в жилой дом в Украине.
- Русский - это не национальнсть, это состояние души абсолютного раба, готового исполнить любые преступные приказы. В любой стране есть люди с подобной ментальностью, скажете вы. Да. Только в России их не 8-12%, как в цивилизованных странах, а 85-89%.
- Оппозиция любит говорить что выборы в России были нечестными. Да, но если бы они были честными, то Путин набрал бы не меньше 75%. Он бы потерял голоса тех избирателей, которые считают Путина достаточно мягким.
From the beginning of human they were near the rivers and establishing trades
@@gymrat5014 Interesting. Must be a same principle but expressed differently
One thing to note is that the map shows some bodies of water that did not exist until 20th century. Rybinsk Reservoir is an example. It might be worth trying to find older digitized maps for future presentations if those are available.
The. U do another video with the changes
ruclips.net/video/PTc1YRqs160/видео.html
...
But in the past there are still more Waters around kiew und the Prypjat.
Of Tartaria for example.
yes we need an accurate map of all swamps!
"He was assassinated and his ashes were then shot out from a cannon towards Poland"
😂
Typical slavic dark humor.
Yea that was funny and terrifying at the same time
The Russians are still hurt that it was the Poles who captured Moscow and occupied it for two years.
@@maciej009 The Poles are still upset with the Russians because Alexander Suvorov defeated Warsaw and half of Poland and ruled over Polish territory for over 120 years.
@@Ruan-z6e Suvorov defeated the Kościuszko Insurgents, fighting against the OCCUPIERS, who partitioned Polish in three (Russia, Prussia, Austria) and murdered 20,000 civilians in Warsaw. Russia itself has never occupied Polish. After losing in 1920, it did so together with Germany on 17.09.1939 (Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact)
12:28 no natural obstacles or resistance? Are you kidding? It was almost impossible to get to Siberia, they had to drag their ships through mountains,set a stay and live through the winter with almost no food and equipment and then conquer the Siberian tribes while Moscow almost didn’t care about them thus no more people or weapons, keep in mind that it was an unfriendly places with severe weather and they was just a group of Cossacks
Yap. Nothing worth mentioning at all...
Yermak is the conqueror of Siberia, he was a bandit and a robber and was caught and brought to trial, but he was asked that he would choose execution or serve Russia, he chose to serve and he was told that he should look and explore unknown and wild lands called Siberia
this guy seems to not know anything about slavis countries history
Who cares about the real and truthful info these days. A seducive visual, thats what important
Thank you:) I am descendant of the Cossacks here in Siberia:)
It is amazing how many times people of this region have fought, merged, divided, turned on allies, became friendly with past enemies and done it over and over again. Up to and including the year 2022.
It's a soap opera....with deadly consequences.
How is history of Europe different?
England, France, Spain, Papal states, Austria(Austro-Hungarian empire), German principalities(latter Prussia)...
7 years war, 30 years war, 100 years war...
Stewart's dynasty, Bourbons, Habsburgs, Popes...
All stabbing each other backs/creating alliances in order to keep balance of power.
Old news.
@@aleksandarcvetkovic5436 It's not except this is post WWII, modern world with protections in place by Russia and most other countries in the world. Has Russia not learned it's lessons. Putin is a madman, no different than Hitler.
@@nickmcnellis3937
Eh, world of politics and powerful states is full of mad people.
One can say Gulf war, invasion on Iraq, destroying Lybia, turning head when Saudi Arabia attacks Yemen was also act of mad people.
But those kind of things depend from what side one gains perspective.
Justifying war is diplomatic skill to convince own people and others that reason is righteous.
Bad thing is opposite side does the same.
I don't like NATO and Russia with same intensity.
Both are warmongers accusing other one for warmongering.
@@aleksandarcvetkovic5436
Europe has developed so much as a result of constant wars. It is obvious. War moves progress faster than anything else.
"And his ashes are fired from a cannon in the direction of Poland" Metal.
Poland: Damn i could've rule the half of the Asia
их подвела демократия - они очень сложно принимали даже простые государственные решения. пытались учитывать мнение каждого дворянина. в то время побеждали более централизованные государства. да и всегда это будет. для простого населения это как правило незаметно никак.
@@drugsl какая демократия?! Их подвели раздоры, коррупция и плохое отношение к не польским народам, населявшим Речь Посполиту
@@parsifal6094more sarmatian culture and democracy only for those people
Like one of thos bums could make whole discussion in senate not important by saying liberum veto
I took a Russian history class in undergrad about 20 years ago, and I really, REALLY wish that they would have used the map visuals that you did, because holy shiz this was WAY more interesting now than reading it in text and listening to lectures back then.
A monk became tsar by bullshitting...unreal.
it was a prank
by Poles
If you live in a country that has become a colony. which is unrealistic. You don't have to speak for other countries!
ruclips.net/video/-aHWAp0GlXA/видео.html RUSSIAN TOP SECRET: REAL HISTORY OF KYIVAN RUS`. Lecture by Oleksandr Palii, Ukrainian historian
@@ЕкатеринаМороз-г3з интересный фанфик.
Не путай Русь и Россию
GeoHistory: uploads
Me: *My happiness is unmeasurable and my day is improved*
I would like to say that Rurik didn't found principality of Novgorod, Novgorodish people invited him to be their king
Moreover, Rurik represented the south Baltic Slavs. So, it was alright for Slavic people to invite an influential Slavonic ruler to rule. After all, who would ever invite a foreigner to rule over their land (as these western morons want us to believe)?
@@N0NamedGui well, I do sound alright. the key thing is that Rurik and his family were Slavonians, unlike the false history insinuations about his Scandinavian origin. back then, as always, people did care about culture. it was important for the ruler to come from a similar or identical culture, ans speak the same language, otherwise it would've been a slavery. only slaves do not need to understand the language of the ruler. so, think twice before you write something here
@@M7i7k7h7a7i7l they
originated from Scandinavia, but we're rulers of sorbs(I suppose that how some of the west Slavs were called). Also, as I already said, being Sorb or Bolgarian is like being foreigner to East Slavs, because they already splitted, they have different languages, and even different religion. Otherwise they wouldn't raid eachother so much.
@@N0NamedGui nope, they never originated from Scandinavia rather Scandinavians have Slavonic origin. As for Rurik, he was a Baltic Slav.
@@M7i7k7h7a7i7l Scandinavians. Have. Slavonic. Origin? That stupid.
Fun Fact: It was Russia who saved The Union during the American Civil War as they sent their Navy to San Francisco and New York when England and France were just about to enter the war on the side of the Confederates since London created the Confederates. France was already in Mexico making a spear head movement to resupply the Confederates and to open up a Pacific Theatre and to create a port in California. England already amassed 11,000 troops and growing stationed at their Northern Confederacies border now called Canada ready to open a Northern Theatre to divert Union troops away from their Southern Confederacy then to attack The Unions naval blockade. The Union would have been completely destroyed and annexed by those two great powers leaving the Confederates to exist as a puppet state of London.
London was already courting (threatening/bribing) other countries to get involved like Spain while Russia was in talks with Prussia to ally with incase London was to intervene.
Seeing all of this Tsar Alexander II wrote a letter to Queen Victoria saying “If you enter in this war it will be a casus belli for all out war with the Russian Empire”. The stage was set for the 1st World War and Russia stopped it.
There is also a memorial in San Francisco for the
hundreds of Russian sailors who came off their Asiatic fleet ships that died while helping the city put out a fire that threatened to lay waste to it during the War.
Wow, never knew so many countries were involved!
@@sravasaksitam The Russian fleet also threatened to Shell Australian ports along with other British Pacific Colonies if Britain aided the Confederates. A confederate war ship spent a lot of time in Australian waters and was supported by the Australian public, some even signing on as crew members. This Confederate war ship laid waist to the US Pacific whaling fleet and is reported to have fired the last shot in the war
Russia also helped Thailand (Kingdom of Siam) maintain its sovereignty from being completely Partitioned/Annexed from the British and French around the same time. The very word Thai (ไทย) means 'free man' in the Thai language which is partially to thank to the Russians as they might have ended up being a colony or part of another country/colony if not for their intervention.
@@JPJ432russia is to responsible for dozen of independent movements in africa or created indirectly the finish state, after 700 years of swedish occupition did russia conquer finland in the wars and gave the fins a country with real borders, autonomy what was a last step to become independent and they dozen of monuments from alexander the second in finland, another example is the armenian genocide, after tsar nicholas heard about it he instantly send hes soldirs to the caucasus to help the people, 394k armenians got saved what was 99% of the population, tsar nicholas is the main reason why this nation exists today
The Civil War was almost entirely a ground war, so it is amazing how a few Russian ships out in the ocean could have made much of a difference. They didn't stop the Confederates from trading cotton or tobacco with Europeans in exchange for weaponry. So you might say the Russians did almost nothing.
@@texaswunderkind For a little more context: The British (City of London) are the ones who created our divide in the first place to put brother against brother. After the war Lincoln wanted to rebuild the South and had plans to do so. He and half his Cabinet were assassinated by London. Many of the others that survived had multiple assassination attempts on them especially William Seward who had like a dozen or so, many almost killing him. Most of the Operations for the Civil War and post war plans and assassinations were made in London and then sent to Montreal a hub for spies and intel in the Americas for the British Empire then passed through to Confederate President Jefferson Davis to follow the orders. Many of the South's own leaders were selling out the South to British interest even General Lee. Unfortunately London had many of their Tentacles and Webs on both sides. Lincoln stated that the Department Of State is completely controlled by British Interest that he had to constantly fight against. It was in the 1870s that a Paradigm Shift happened were the British took control within the Reunited States through subversion (which was easy to do so as all their agents were brought back into the Union and a large part of their opposition killed) and have had it all the way up to this day. Some presidents fought against it like Garfield, McKinley, Harding, Roosevelt, and Kennedy and all were killed. Probably the best book to read on the subject is "The Clash of the Two Americas. The Unfinished Symphony" by Matthew Ehret. I have no affiliation with them but they also have an audiobook which can make it easier since not many people like to sit down and read anymore. It has multiple references on the bottom of each page of the book.
2:52 "yaroslav the wise"
a wise king! nice can't wait for all his great reforms
3:28 "yaroslav devides the Kievan Rus among his sons"
(╯°□°）╯︵ ┻━┻ DAMN IT YAROSLAV
He, actually, made a first written law in Russia, Russkaya Pravda. Also he is first person who started stone building, but that is just forgotten
@@tyryonolofing3405 that was the first written law in Rus. Rus is not Russia, like Roman Empire is not Romania
@@OrkosUA comprasion is incorrect obviously, but this was first written law in the medieval state of Rus, and geographically also first for future Russian State, which is direct successor to the north-eastern principalities, broken up from Kievan Rus. More clearly, Suzdal-Vladimir principality splited from Kievan Rus, and was using laws of Yaroslav, and after Mongol invasion, when Suzdal and Vladimir were brutally sacked and destroyed, principality splited again, and one of them was principality of Moscow, which after three hundred years of reunification, will finally assume title of Tsar. So it's not like Romania and Rome, because it's countinious, has similar dynasty and religion, and some cultural stuff is much closer.
@@tyryonolofing3405 don't bother explaining history to Ukrainian. They are still pissed they were left on outskirts (the literal translation of the name "Ukraine") while their heirs ran north and freed themselves from Mongols and Poles several hundred years earlier than they did with the Ukraine. The fact Rurikids had continuous dynasty up to 1530es first relocating to Vladimir way before the Mongol invasion and then ending up in Moscow - Vladimir's colony - wont fit in his mind.
@@cianakril may be.. But I still hope for the best. Also, you see, in reality it's even more complicated, because boyar's families of Moscow, Novgorod and Lithuanian-controled parts of Rus, including cadet braches of Rurikid and Olgedovich's. In fact, Shyiskie were cadet branch for Rurikid dynasty, and that was enough to accept their overturn against poland-backed Lzhedmitriy. And one of the most powerful, and crucial supporter of Romanovs in their attempt to assume tsardom in 1613 was boyar house Trubetskiye, who were.. Cadet branch for former Lithuanian kingdom dynasty.
Ivan Turgenev once wrote:
"Nature creates while destroying, and doesn't care whether it creates or destroys as long as life isn't extinguished, as long as death doesn't lose its rights"
It is true, and what is more true is that even if life are extinguish, Nature doesn't care, as it is still a part of nature at the end.
That is the law of the entire Universe. Matter and life are all cyclical. But do we understand the why? Why is existence in an ever expanding Universe cyclical instead of a steady line of immortal progression? Does the illusion of choice which humans and other animals make really even matter in the grand scheme of things here on Earth when eventually our Sun will die too? All of our historical choices will be for naught. The rest of the Universe does not care.
“In the end we will be judged not by what we have destroyed.
But what we have created.”
-Wilhelm Strasse
Nature doesn't care if mankind or all creatures go extinct.
Turgenev is considered a Russian, but in fact a Tatar, because in fact there were never any Russians in Muscovy))
To those who debate on whether the Kievan Rus was Russian or Ukrainian, I challenge you to provide an answer to the question of whether Charlemagne's empire was French or German as it is a similar question to the one you are trying to answer.
Charlemagne's empire was French
@@ІванГриць-в3р Frankish
@@patricofritz4094, exactly my point.
@@nathanpangilinan4397 France and Germany made up it is time for Ukraine and Russia to do the same . They are one people divided over time . They are both the successors of Kievan Rus . Only one is in line with the West and the other is ...well ...Russia
No dude. They presented "history of USA as UK" here. Its diffrent story. Sioux will never be brit same as Russian will never be Rusyn, who is slavic, european like brit. Difference is that there is no sea beteeen colony (Russia) and orgin (Ruś).
Kievan Rus' is a not a country, it's a term invented in 19th century to describe a time period.
it was just the 'Rus'
Kiyv existed for 400 years before Novgorod was founded. Putin is telling you some fantasy story.
@@timkruger7365 not the point. the point is that where was no such country with name "Kievan Rus". How old is Kiev is completely different discussion. I don't know where you get 400, most likely 50-150 older
@@kykah01 There was no such country as Ancient Egypt. The term Ancient was applied well during the Common Era and the actual name of the country was Kumat.
Words exist to simplify communication. Just like in "Ancient Egypt" the word "Ancient" serves to clarify that we are indeed talking about the period of history before Christ, the word "Kievan" simply emphasizes that we're talking about the period of history when Kiev was the center, nothing more, nothing less. Otherwise we'd need to rename Germany into Deutschland, Japan into Nippon and Greece into Ellada.
@@olegshevchenko5869 Yes, ok... But we're talking maps here. You don't put a country called "Ancient Egypt" on a map.
Im still affected by the new voiceover.
Complete Agree
but its getting more normal
I'm your 100th liker and I could say that I've heard this voice on multiple channels, for example "Ridddle"
I'm your 100th liker and I could say that I've heard this voice on multiple channels, for example "Ridddle"
I'm your 100th liker and I could say that I've heard this voice on multiple channels, for example "Ridddle"
6:42 It's unfear to say that there was no resistance to mongols. But yes, most of the cities fell and were burned and sacked.
Yeap, I was searching such a comment, because that is true - we - Russians fight and lost, fight and lost time and time again, but the Mongol horde lost a part of their numbers - of course I want to say major part, but I do not now numbers, so let limit only to part.
Why Mongols win? Because feudal diversity - one "prince " we call kniaz - князь - can fight alone against whole of horde and eventually lose to power of numbers, tactics and superior power of cavalry units, later on Huangary fight also in hard battles mainly due to internal problems between monarch and aristocracy, also lose, go to retreat, some years later return to already diminished force due to attrition from fight and diseases which also were at way back to Mongol capital due the death of chan
@@НикитаГруздов-т8э It's something I'm sympathetic to, because the common understanding of Chinese resistance was "China fell, Yuan was declared, and then the Mongols conquered everyone". this comes from a misunderstanding of the "China among Equals" period, where the Jurchen (proto Manchu) dynasty was able to conquer a significant chunk of the northern heartland, including Beijing, and declared themselves as the holders of the Mandate of Heaven. They fell to the Mongols quickly, but the Song dynasty held out long enough (till 1279) for the Mongols to have brought over Persian trebuchets, subjugated the Russian principalities (1230s-40s), invaded Lithuania, Poland, the Romanian principalities, Hungary, Austria, northeast Italy, Croatia, Serbia, and Bulgaria (1240s), sacked Baghdad, and pushed into Anatolia and the Levant before they fell.
Kievan Rus it’s period until lands were divide between princes.
This term was introduced in the 20th century to define a period of time when the capital was in Kyiv.
Kievan Rus was a state before Mstislav in 10XX (dont remebmer year) signed a decree on the "patrimony", which leads to collapse of the Kievan Rus
@@SvinnayaOtbivnaya бред сивой кобылы. Изучите реальные исторические источники..
Древняя русь
@@ВладимирДавыдов-з9в мдаа смотря на тебя зразу видно как советская история сделала с человека зомбаря
@@Roma-cn8vd интересно, а какая же тогда история? Расскажи-ка мне
Весь мир твердит одну историю, а в Украине, ПОСЛЕ 14 ГОДА, другую
Хотя можешь и не пытаться, ведь всё равно твои слова окажутся полным бредом
As an American we never learned about this. In school we learn about fifty states and history for half of our school career.
Конечно ,ваша история по возрасту как наш "большой театр"
Same, when I was at school in the UK we only learn European history 1874-1980
В США плохо с преподаванием истории в школах. Это известно.
We havent even learned about ww2
Why would you have to learn russian history?
As a Bulgarian - thank you for mentioning the Bulgarian Empire and Volga Bulgaria, not a lot of people are familiar with the history. 🇧🇬❤🇧🇬
you have nothing to do with those bulgarians because they were turkic of mongolian race, and you are slavic of european race. you simply stole their name.
@@joedoe9208 That's complete BS, very few Bulgarians are of 100% Slavic origin and genetic studies prove it too. Don't spread stupid sh*t on the internet.
@@joedoe9208 We are their descendants - a mix of Bulgar and Slavic ancestry. Quit your lies, you ain't fooling anyone.
@@joedoe9208 The DNA analyses prove what I'm saying. Check for it online or ask any Bulgarian that has done it. Lmao you are desperate, aren't you?
@@joedoe9208 First Bulgaria Empire was Turkic empire with Slavic/Hellenic influence , Volga Bulgaria was %100 Turkic
When someone says "Kievan Rus" he can turn his diploma back to McDonalds. This term appeared in XX century and refers to historical period, it was never a name of country.
@Młody PiSowiec
It was simply Rus, Russian Land or Russia which is just Rus’ in Latin.
Rus' and Russia is not the same. It is like Rome and Romania.
russian ancestors - the most insignificant remnants of Ugrians, Finns and other defeated nomadic and semi-nomadic tribes.
@@sirenka9192 Russia is a latin version of name "Rus", on western maps Rus was marked as Russia.
This version of Ugrian-finns ancestors is popular between ukrainian nazis, but genetic researches show that it is false.
@@TheLustmord88 Not exactly, Russia (Рѡсїѧ) is the Greek word for the name Rus' (Русь). When the tsar of the Moscovites Peter 1 issued a decree on the renaming of Moskovia, it was a deliberate theft of the Rus brand, but he could not rename it directly, so he used the Greek word. Moskovia is the same Rus' as Abibas is Adidas. The reason for such theft was that historically the lands of Moskovia inhabited by wild Ugro-Finnish tribes left the Stone Age relatively recently, only in the 10th century AD, but mentally they are still in the Stone Age.
@@sirenka9192 No historical documents can prove it, while all documents we have and archeology prove it's wrong, but ukrainian nazis like to believe this delusion.
I used to feel sleepy during history classes but with such great way of story telling and visualizations , history becomes quite interesting .
No wonder you liked it this video has little in common with history learned in class
ruclips.net/video/PTc1YRqs160/видео.html
...
I mean read a book from a good source. This video has a lot of mistakes. He mentions countries that appear hundreds of years later.
This video is a mistake :) One question - how lived russians before Rurik and from what place they had come?
@Azur aria of course, why would you not bother to answer then? 😂
5:36 i always love this moment in geo history when an unknown boss battle is about to come
Can’t wait for part 2 Romanov expansion into Siberia, Alaska and more battles with Sweden
Well Siberia was an empty wasteland and it was completely uninhabitable, it had a lot of natural resources but nobody new that until the Russians came along. They quickly expanded and claimed the whole region because there was no human resistance as they were the first to claim the area
@@ZeroEagle667 Just like dessert of big chunk of Canada and West coast USA
@@ZeroEagle667 actually Russians met many foreign tribes during expansion, some resisted and some submitted willingly
@@afdalridwan3813 I hope you're being sarcastic
Yay! Part 2 has landed!!
Sometimes i am puzzled by what Russia was capable of. Why is it we never learnt about these great conquest of land and only learnt about the Roman Empire?
Потому что это придуманная история,чтобы скрыть реальную
@@neo7555 как скажешь, братан.😂
@neo7555 what's the real story?
@@NTEPNTсмотри Интервью Путина ) с Такером
@@jeckson9673 тут треть видео из пальца высосана, года так до 1050 примерно
Your maps are THE BEST backdrop to your script . . . EVER. It makes so many connections for my understanding. Thanks!!
Understanding what? Primitive Russophobic propaganda? It was exposed back in the 17th century by the Russian historian, academician Lomonosov: the version that Rurik is of Scandinavian origin was invented by the Swedes during their war with Peter 1. This is banal, military propaganda. Rurik was from the Baltic Slavs, and this is officially recognized by all real historians.
And advice for the future: in relation to Russia, from English-speaking sources - you will never hear anything but lies and propaganda. You can not even hope to find at least something true - you will not find it.
@@alexgainsborough4921 Ukrainians are Polished Russians who arose during the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth. You are afraid to admit it because it is a nightmare for you.
There are such a good scenario in this it could be used for a 8 seasons TV show like Game of thrones :)
Joke apart, this is truly interesting... and complex history !
indeed it is! For example before Ivan III the Great was Visilliy II the Dark - his face was mutilated and he was blinded by his rivals who hope he will never get on the throne being blind, but he claimed the throne and rule for the 37 years
You should definitely do a video about the Frankish empire/francia. Its such an interesting topic and era and I would love to see a video from this channel made about this!
Ivan IV was such a tyrant that he killed a thousand times fewer people than his contemporary King Henri IV of France. What irony))
Yeah
And Bloody Mary (Mary I of England) wasn't called bloody for nothing.
Comparing to his collogues from the Western Europe of the same period he was almost a saint.
I like your old voice than new
Ok Napoleon LOL
Me 2
Me 3
Its Matthew Bates, he voices Meet Arnold and Ridddle
@@rsnobal we all know already
I love how these videos show that human history is the history of civilizations rising and falling… conquering and being conquered…
Интересно что Рыбинское водохранилище было уже в древние времена
Тоже заметил
Там племя рыбичей жило
а украины не было вообще!
@@РоманДмитриев-ь3ю Территория Украины, тогда называлась Русь,а предки украинцев русами,русинами.Еще с 17 века сохранилась Печать Ивана Выговского,где он- Воевода Киевский Княжества Рускаго.А также Богдан Хмельницкий заключал договора от имени народа Рускаго, например «Договор между Турецким цесарем и Войском Запорожским и народом Русьским о торговле на Черном море», - так называемая Черноморская конвенция Украины с Турцией.1649год.
@@РоманДмитриев-ь3ю как и российской федерации
Interesting how there is one story but many interpretations. Different country, different story for the same event. ;)
But, the basic overview of centuries is helpful. Even though some smaller details may differ from story to story.
Hungarian capital became a global city after the unification of Buda, Óbuda and Pest on 17 November 1873, with the name 'Budapest'. So no mongol conquerors could do anything about Budapest at the time - for it didn't exist. If it's history then let's take it seriously ;)
Rus’
*not to be confused with “Russia”, which derives its name from the Rus’ but historically is a completely different state, which almost all its existence was at war with the Rus’.
Just like the Holy Roman Empire was actually Germany, Russia is actually Muscovy, despite their best attempts to convince everybody otherwise.
Its name “Russia" received only in 1721, when Peter I passed a decree to change Tsardom of Muscovy’s name into the “Russian” Empire (“Russia” originates from Rosia, name used by the Greek Orthodox Clergy in regards to Kyivan Rus')
Under the reign of Cathrine II Muscovites where even pushed for continuing to identify as Muscovites, and where forced to call themselves “Russian”.
Lands that “Russia” claims were part of the original Rus’, but actually weren't, are Novgorod, Suzdal, and Ryazan, since in historical texts of XI-XII centuries they are mentioned as separate entities from Rus’. They can be considered parts of extended Rus’, although their culture was distinct from main Rus’.
In 1493 Moscow prince Ivan III appointed himself to be the Great Ruler of All Rus’. No other kings acknowledged that. From that point on Muscovy started to make false claims on Rus’ ownership.
“Russia” is an offshoot of Ukraine and not the other way round, despite what Soviet and “Russian” historians have been trying to say for years. Kiev was a developed cultured capital when Moscow was just another swamp village.
Germany used to call itself the Holy Roman Empire, that didn’t mean they became the Romans, and all of a sudden had a right to claim whole of Italy and its history, but yet, that’s exactly what “Russia” did in regards to Rus’-Ukraine.
@@vredacted3125 "“Russia” is an offshoot of Ukraine"
Do you even understand how absolutely stupid this sounds?
Ukraine is just a Russian word for "border region". Russia started in Kiev and even though it lost Kiev for some time, that doesn't mean that somehow Russia now is an offshoot of the "border region".
Stop pushing this weird propaganda. Stop rewriting history.
@@DoubleBob you are mistaken
@@DoubleBob Ukraine in russian kinda sound like border land. and Russians often speculate that ukraine was border land of russian empire.
Itself it doesn't make much sense, since t it's symbols existed long before russian empire took it's name in 18th century.
(past 300 years)
And in Rus' language Ukraine, one of the meaning is - inner country, meaning, center of Rus'
@@vredacted3125 So, you simply assume that the video is based on fake history and e.g. Kievan Rus didn't exist?
Also why do you think the Russian Empire "took" it's name from a country that didn't exist?
"And in Rus' language Ukraine, one of the meaning is - inner country, meaning, center of Rus'"
Provide some evidence for that, cause I believe you've fallen victim to strange nationalist propaganda that started during the 19th century, but which wasn't remotely mainstream. But why would you believe fringe views that deliberately rewrite history and play word games just to dupe the ignorant into accepting lies.
You should continue with the timeline, I felt I’m missing part 2
Description
@@ilyashuster3447 My friend Google is not opening, I need help. Can you tell me where the Turks live, the names of a few Turkish empires and a few modern Turkish states?
@@videocvdv7317 I am so sorry he did not say anything after 1 month
Wish granted
You're right, because Russian Federation appeared only 30 years ago.
1610: Imagine what could happen if polish king didn't want to convert Russia into catholicism and he became Tsar. History would be totally different with Polish-Lithuanian-Russian Empire.
Uncle Joe made a mistake to enlarge Poland at the expense of Germany.
@sir hill Wow! Let’s everyone go back to his indigenous land then! My argument is different. Without Soviet victory there would be neither Poland nor Russia as we know them today. Polish people should be more humble and less full of themselves for Poland was defeated and subdued, what they have now has bee given to them at the expense of millions of German people who were ethnically cleansed from Silesia, East Prussia, and Pomerania.
@sir hill why did the Second World War not begin with the partition of Czechoslovakia by Poland and Germany? Ah, it's inconvenient just to remember it. I understand. I will also add that Poland was divided not by Germany and Russia, but by Germany and the USSR. You need to know the history
@@ericingefara4179 This 1k km2 of Silesia was taken from us by force in 1919, and we agreed to keep it in Czechoslovakia in 1920, when Red Army was at the Warsaw gates. Btw, in 1919 there was approx 150 k. Poles living there, but in 1938 only 20 k....
We were not a signatory of Munich treaty, and we earlier proposed Czechs common defence against Germans, but Benes wonted us to allow Stalin's Red Army to go through Poland with help for them. Great idea! ;-) And contrary to Germans or soviet's we did not threw out people from their houses, nor arrest them and send to Siberia, nor shut in the back of head...
That makes the difference which Putin is not telling for an obvious reasons (although he likes to remind this example of "polish aggression" as a counter - example for soviets massive genocide crimes).
And if you diversify so strictly between Russia and USSR, why Russians are not doing this, or doing this only to deny ties between soviet genocides and Russia?
More like Polish-Polish-Polish empire. It might have been called Poland-Lithuania, but Lithuanians were marginalised and polonised (and Ruthenians were practically cattle).
Yaroslav diving his empire among his sons reminds me of Charlemagne who did something similar.
There was a fierce stubborn resistance of the Russian Slavs to the Mongol hordes. A lot of examples, incl a town of Koselsk (near modern Ryazan), that had been called The Fierce Town by the Mongols with all of its people incl women fighting to the end. But the forces were clearly unequal. It was a giant Horde and if not for the total Russian resistance that had depleted its initial punch, all of the Europe would have been conquered. You can see it from the sheer size of the Mongol empire set up by Genghis Khan who had subdued the China in the first place
Китай пал только в 1279 году, гораздо позже большей части Руси. К тому же не вся Русь была покорена монголами, а лишь бо́льшая часть.
Sp Europe should thank Russian?
@@user-pd9ju5dk5s rather bulgarians and poles. Russia paid tribute to them and showed little resistance
@@12crenshaw Russians did resist the Mongols - hence many burned cities and overall decline of cultural and economic life in Kievan principality that had become the Wild Plain (Dikoe Pole). Those who paid tribute and showed no resistance were not ruined.
Poland and Bulgar (Volga bulgars) were also pillaged, if you want to thank them for that, well, up to you.
@@12crenshaw haha polish propaganda😂
"The divided principalities did not resist the Mongols"...
What an utterly incompetent thing to say. It took almost 5 years to conquer almost all of Rus. Look up the siege of Kozelsk, named the "wicked city" by the Mongols.
7:10 But... Novgorod wasn't captured by mongols
At 8:50 , there was a misunderstanding. Jadwiga of Anjou was a King of Poland, not a queen, so he obtained the hand of Polish king
Jadwiga is a woman's name.
@@valdonagaverно она была королем
@@OLZAKinchik I do not know Russian. I did not send this.🫣
Its crazy how bulgaria started in russia and moved their terriotory to the balkans
Uh no, that's 2 different countries
@@gifigi600 Not true, Volga Bulgaria was essentially the Bulgars which came to Europe from Asia and the Ural mountains, Volga Bulgaria moved their tribes to their modern position when they were forced to leave river Volga because of Cumania's rapid expansion and the Turkic tribes.
@@LaVaZ000 oh.
@@gifigi600 not all of them left though. Some stayed and remained the volgha bulgars but those who went south mixed with the local slavs and became the bulgarians.
You're right I didn't knew this and I'm very shocked that Bulgaria first kingdom was in present russia
When you are faster than russian winter
Napoleon went and almost won, Hitler tried and failed miserably.
@@ommsterlitz1805 good call
Lol
Or the Spanish conquistadors
@@ommsterlitz1805 *The Polish-Lithuanians, Charles XII, Napoleon & Hitler all failed lol.
I still want the old voice back. :-(
No
No
*YES*
please
Very well done, thank you!
FYI: this is low-quality content that greatly distorts the real history. A lot of key things are glossed over or distorted, and this creates a completely wrong perception of what really happened. One gets the impression that the author is simply quoting propagandistic history textbooks that have been produced in Moscow for centuries.
Ukraine never existed before 1917
@ThebrainlessCat-pc6siBullshit
@@bohdan___5963 tell us ucrainian propaganda
This is so interesting and makes you think about the politics of Russia and the immense historical data accessible to them to study in depth civilizations, conflicts, and human nature revealed over centuries. The same thing can be said of china.
Lies again? Orlando City
One of the things I love about studying history, is that you often can see the unfolding of events over time. For instance, the year of 1848 was pivotal in world history due to the large numbers of wars and rebellions going on. I don't have the energy to type a dissertation, so I'll keep it short. It shaped much of early 20th century Europe, that lead to both World Wars (and several interim conflicts and wars). It also starts to put current events into a different perspective as well. When Russia first moved into Ukraine, Putin said something about reclaiming ancient lands. I'm in no way supporting what he is doing, but objectively; Kiev is 'ancient Russia'. *I will re-iterate. I oppose this illegal war and believe in a free, peaceful and sovereign Ukraine.*
@@matthewmartin5763 If you're using the state of that time as an argument, if anything it should be Kyiv in power over Russia and not the other way round.
@@uandubh5087 Maybe that will eventuate. Hope so.
Guys! If every country begin to reclaim it's "ancient" territories we suppose to be at constant and forever war. Coz 99% of countries worldwide got an ancient land that belongs to its neighbors at that moment. So what? We all have to fight?! Just imagine about Italy, UK, Germany, Greece, Turkey,.Bulgaria, Hungary, Austria, Norway, Sweden, Denmark, Mongolia and many many more. I even didn't mention both America's, Asia and Africa. What if all of them reclaim their old borders?
Rurik was invited to an already existing city
there was no single city on the territory populated by slavic people
@@joedoe9208 This is bullshit.
@@gordeyvolnik why? is it because you simply don't know the archeological definition of what can be called a city? or a town? do you? can you bring 4 major criteria of the definition of a town?
@@joedoe9208 He compares Novgorod with Russian cities, not with foreign cities.
@@hazelich9113 there is no such the term as "russian city" or "not russian city" in archeology. Besides, city is not a human and can't have a nationality. However archeology has a strict definition of what can be called a town and what can't be called as a settlement. So taking into the consideration the fact that none of you know this, I repeat once again: there was no single town (not even city) on the territory of "rus". The only town was kiev, however it was established by turkic Khazars, not slavs.
I heard a story that Ivan the terrible’s son was pushing his old man… saying something along the lines of “Lol, what are you gonna do? kill me?”
Actually, some historians claim that Ivan the Terrible's son was pissed off by his father who strongly disapproved of his wife wearing clothes he hadn't liked and behaving, in Tsar Ivan's opinion, badly. Matter of fact, he even beat her. Ivan's son therefore sticked up for his wife. You know the ending
Not to mention the fact that his son's wife was pregnant
@@denissuccess3304 actually its more like legend. If you are son of Tsar, your wife have so many servants, who know about clothes and stuff, so its practically impossible to be in front of the Tsar and be dressed improperly.
@@denissuccess3304 that’s a myth actually-there is no evidence or at least anything that points out the assumption that he actually killed his son
Yes
**Stab**
Tucker Carlson: So why did you invade Ukraine?
Putin: In the 9th Century A.D, Scandinavia Was Populated-
Just FYI Ivan the Terrible didnt kill that many people compared to other European leaders of that time. The whole 'Terrible' thing is mistranslation imo and the closer one would be Ivan the Fearsome.
Прозвище грозный дали европейские историки , на самом деле его звали 'Иван -Мудрый'
@Imaginary Unicorn cant believe I am saying this but check what Bartholomew Night is. Or maybe where did the Aztecs go. Or maybe what Teutons did to the very same Lithuanians you were talking about. Russia surely had its share of terrible dictators but Ivan IV was a pretty good guy by 16th century standarts
Yes , russian word Грозный(that how he called in Russia), not meen terrible , it meen more like a stern maybe or hard , but absolutely not terrible. This word start using britain to demonizated Russia like always
To hopefully counter all the "New Voice New Feeling" Comments, it's honestly fine. I really like this new voice over.
interesting, giving a good overview of the major developments taking place! I look forward to the next chapters
There were many principalities in Rus', and in different periods different principalities had greater influence. First, Novgorod was the most influential, then Kiev became the most influential. then Rus' fell into decline, after which Kiev lost all influence as it was plundered and burned, and the Grand Duchy of Vladimir became the new center of influence in Rus' for objective reasons, then the Grand Duchy of Vladimir turned into the Grand Duchy of Moscow, again simply because on the territory In the most influential Principality of Rus', a new most influential city appeared, which, for objective reasons, like Kiev and Novgorod earlier, began to attract wealth and people, Moscow became the most important trading center of Rus'. And after that, the Grand Duchy of Moscow, having depleted most of the free Rus', Turns into Tsardom of Russia and later into the Russian Empire. Not one historian in the world has no doubts about this. Only among Ukrainians, whose entire Wikipedia is full of both pseudo-history and lies, moreover, closed from editing? How is it that the Ukrainian wiki is 80% different from wikis in any other languages of the world where everything converges into the same facts. What are you afraid of closing articles from editing? What would real historians and scientists not be able to correct this nonsense? And yes, at what point in history, except in your imagination, did the name Muscovy exist as real name of the state?
I think it's because they have a national identity crisis. There are also many nationalistic biggots on both sides (Russia & Ukraine).
Just with a logicial & unbiased mindset, anyone should see that they all share the same heritage. It reflects their language, culture & history.
Super sad to see how they divided.
I personally blame a mixture of the Mongol Invasion, the Polish/Lithuanian Commonwealth & Communism for the division of the Rus (Belarus, Russia, Ukraine)
Muscovy is called in other languages the Grand Duchy of Moscow. Just as the Grand Duchy of Lithuania is simply called Lithuania.
This can be seen if you watch this video in different languages (this channel has analogues in different languages and related videos)
@@Ki-dz4ro 1) Anna Yaroslavna (daughter of Prince Yaroslav the Wise and Queen of France) in the west is called Anna Russian.
2) Also Rus' and Russia - the words are similar.
3) The term "Kievan Rus" appeared only in the 19th century, as a designation of the time period when Kyiv was the capital of the country. So was Ladoga Rus (approximately 859-862), Novgorod Rus (862-882), Vladimir Rus (1243-1389), then Moscow Rus (1389-1547 (or 1478)). It was just Rus'. We don't say "Moscow Russia" or "Petersburg Russia", no, we don't.
4) When Kyiv was captured by Prince Oleg, he gave him the title "Mother of Russian Cities". And throughout our history, Kyiv has been with such a title.
5) The art that has developed throughout the history of Rus' is called Old Russian art. (Even on Wikipedia it says)
6) “Let us not disgrace the Russian land, but lie down with bones, for the dead have no shame!” (It is difficult to translate into English) - this is how Prince Svyatoslav addressed the squad before the battle of Arcadiopol in 970.
This is the expression of Prince Svyatoslav from "The Tale of Bygone Years".
7)Rus and the Grand Duchy of Moscow and the Russian kingdom (until 1598) were ruled by the Rurik dynasty.
That is why the history of Rus' is the history of Russia
@@ДианаВоробец-з2о To be exact, Russia wants to claim the history of Rus))) While Ukraine has the capital of Rus - Kyiv, the money of Rus - hryvnia, and the symbol of Rus - trydent (tryzub).
@@_vital_p Мы ведь можем говорить не по английски, верно? Каким образом Россия "ХоЧит укРастЬ истОрИЮ рУСИ"? Династия с момента основания Руси и до создания Русского Царства - Одна. Это были Рюриковичи. И к тому же была одна религия - православие. Русины, Русские, Русы, Рутены и пр. пр писания - это все синонимы. Если вы отсчитываете свою историю от захвата юго-западных земель Литвой, то это позорище. Русы были там холопами, там даже и речь не шла о каком то равном отношении к бывшему населению Руси. И страна эта была КАТОЛИЧЕСКОЙ. По этому да, Руская история это история России, история, в которой последняя отстояла право на свою независимость и построила огромное государство
The misstake after the first minute of the video: Oleg is not Ruriks heir, but a regent to Ruriks heir Igor
#BradHartliep, of Royal Blood, descended from the #Viking #Kings of #Rus and #Kiev, descended from #Tsars of the #Rus and the #Romanov, the only Rightful #President and #Tsar of #Russia, and the only #Tsar who can #SaveRussia and #Restore the #RussianEmpire .. #TsarBrad, #KingOfRussia
Kyiv founded in 482. Novgorod founded almost 400 YEARS LATER in 859.
@@user-pv7bf2nv3j yet the Novgorod and its duke united the Rus and captured Kiev, not otherwise
9:00 Muscovy? Bruh. Muscovy never really existed. It was "Duchy of Moscow"
Nivgorod was existing before Rurik.
Novgorod
Some people fail to understand that Kievan Rus was a mix of modern day Russia, Ukraine and Belarus TOGETHER.
some people do not understand that such a comment supports the occupation of the territory of Ukraine by the Russians and the death of hundreds of thousands of people
So? That was 100’s of years ago. I’m expecting Kalinigrad to be returned to Germany
Ivan the 4th haven't actually killed his son. It's a common myth=)
And he was terrible to all the enemies, but not for his homeland :)
It is disappointing how Western videos about Russian history fall short when it comes to Ivan the Formidable. They completely butcher the history of his rule and even present myths as historical facts.
bullshit
@@DmitryPekarev опричнина ни о чем тебе не говорит?
@@legslutor1172 в каком контексте? Вы лекцию прочитать хотите о том, как царь использовал прослойку более бедных бояр/дворян (которая и стала опричниной) в борьбе с богатыми? ))
It's funny to see on the map that tells about the Early Middle Ages, all the modern water reservoirs that arose in the middle of the 20th century.
So Thats why slavic mythology similar to norse and viking mythology
Norse is Viking mythology
@@Mike1zKool was think norse is meaning european tribes during roman era from Scotland to Scandinavian (vikings) to the german tribes
@@TEKKKNO the Scottish didn’t believe in Norse stuff
@@Mike1zKool yes that's why i say norse and viking,bcoz i was think norse for all north tribes not for vikings 👍anyway all ancient mythologies sharing alot of similar things almost same ideas and gods with different names
Russian textbooks give the year 1147 and say Moscow was founded by Prince Yuri Dolgoruky.
Sure as hell, there is a Yuri Dolgoruky statue in Moscow.
In reality the year 1147 is the first mention of Moscow in Russian chronicles. Yuri Dolgoruky, Prince of Vladimir and Suzdal, invited his ally Svyatoslav, Prince of Novgorod-Seversk, to come visit him in Moscow. “Come to me, my brother, to Moskov” - Yuri wrote him.
What can we infer from this phrase? Evidently, Moscow was important enough to be known to Svyatoslav without further indications and to serve as a meeting place for two important allies. We can be quite sure it was founded before 1147. Unfortunately, we will probably never know who did it (Yuri or one of his predecessors) and when exactly.
But we can say what was the role of Moscow in 12th century.
In 12th century, Rus’ disintegrated into a number of principalities. The princes started to fight each other for the control of Kiev, because the Prince of Kiev was considered the overlord. As a result, Kiev was regularly devastated by various Russian princes. Four centres of power emerged: Galich, Chernigov, Smolensk and Vladimir-Suzdal .
The bloody war of 1146-1154 opposed two alliances. Yuri Dolgoruky was the leader of one of them. Yuri’s allies are (Vladimir-Suzdal, Novgorod-Seversk, Galich, Old Prussians and Polovtsi). His enemies are (Smolensk, Chernigov, Ryazan, Volhynia, Poland and Hungary).Moscow was a strategic fortress on the border of Yuri Dolgoruky’s lands facing three enemy principalities at the same time. No wonder he choose Moscow to welcome his ally.
No one, of course, could imagine the future of this border fortress. Yuri Dolgoruky would laugh a lot if they told him that the posterity remembers him almost exclusively as the founder of Moscow.
There was no such thing as "russia" 😂 Anyone in Kyivan Rus' would laugh their ass of if they knew there's some eastern finno ugric country tries to steal this name 🤦🤣
I love how Yaroslav’s solution to a fratricidal war was dividing the state, which would lead to more fratricidal wars. So much for Yaroslav the “Wise”.
Jaroslav
@@danielacerna5999 Yaroslav Mudryi(wise) not Jaroslav
Popularly called The Golden Horde, the domains of the heirs of Jochi were not known by that name. The term ‘Golden Horde’ does not enter the sources until the sixteenth century, when Russian chroniclers referred to the domains as Zolotaia Orda, the Golden Camp or Palace.¹ During the Mongol era, they were known as the Kipchak Ulus or Khanate or the Jochid Ulus or Khanate. The Kipchak Khanate appellation came later and was a substitution for the Dasht-i Kipchak, or the Kipchak Steppes.
May, Timothy. “The Jochid Ulus or Golden Horde.” The Mongol Empire, Edinburgh University Press, 2018, pp. 280-314,
Orda is not a "camp or palace", Orda literally means Horde.
Ulus Juchi was part of Golden Horde. This name was deleted by moscovian officials when they try to argue their claims on old Rus' in 17-18th centuries. Later they officially steal the name "Russia" from Ukraine (1721). Actually modern Russian Federation has wery few connections to old medieval Rus' politically and culturally. It's typical post Mongol Khanate (state) with strong cultural and ethnic influence of ancient finnish tribes.
And the mongols inserted all their DNA in russia.
Juhatasid mind mõtlema
P😅😅
Wow Russian history looks so unstable and violent. It's impressive they managed to get so much territory together
Because we are Russians and God is with us(С) Alexander Suvorov
@@delight2229 If God was with Russians it wouldn't have created the USSR, as it was atheist country
There is no achievement. All this territory was conquered by Tatars. However Golden Horde(the Tatar's empire) had a war against tamerlan/timur and as a result Golden Horde was broken into several bleeding out Kaghanates(states). However tamerlan did not touch russians and as a result after several cenruties this allowed russians to occupy Tatar's lands. But russians never built a state and now russia under go the third wave of breaking up so as a result soon you will see russia totally crushed.
@@MrEnric98 russians make up a lot of BS, like the one this "heh" wrote here. Don't pay attention to this i...t.
@@MrEnric98 ussr was the time of learning
On video the false history of origin of Russia is presented. Inhabitants of Ladoga have invited Rurik who with great probability was Russ on roots, but lived in area of Scandinavia as there are even evidences that on Germanic Lands lived settlements with Russ that is confirmed by archeological finds. Now about other facts:
1. The state "Kievan Rus" never existed. This fictitious name has been entered into the use by the Soviet historians within the limits of policy of derusification of Russian history. Rus (Russia) only according to Byzantine sources existed already in the 9th century, but Kiev at that time worked for the Khazars.
2. The first capital of Russia Ladoga was founded by Slovenes ca. 700 г.
3. In the conclusion of the contract with Rurik participated Slavic tribes Slovene and Krivichi and Finnish tribes Chud and Merja (according to the Novgorod I Chronicle) or all (according to the Tale of Bygone Years).
4 From cities of initial, Rurik's, Russia (Ladoga, Novgorod, Izborsk, Beloozero, Rostov, Murom, Polotsk) 6 are in Russia, 1 - in Byelorussia, in Ukraine - none.
5. Askold, Dir, Oleg, Igor, Svyatoslav, Vladimir and Yaroslav came from Ladoga or Novgorod and conquered Kiev by force. There were no cases of conquest in the opposite direction.
6. Before the conquest of Russia, Kiev was a Khazar city. Its earliest documentary mention is in the "Kiev Jewish letter" of the beginning of the tenth century in the expression "kagal of Kiev".
7. The words "Se budi mati city Russkymi", which the annals attribute to Oleg, mean the proclamation of Kiev as the main city of Rus, and not the origin of Rus from Kiev.
8. Kiev had a Turkic name - Mankerman.
9.Kiev was on southern border of Russia with Turkic lands.The geographical center of Russia was between Smolensk and Moscow.
10.The army of Prince Oleg, with which he conquered Kiev, included Varangians, Slovenes, Krivichi, Chud, Merja and all.After conquering Kiev, Oleg imposed a tribute on its population in favor of the Slovenes, Krivichi and Meri.
A colored map and the year at the top of the page
REALLY helps me comprehend history like nothing else!
Thank you very much 🍉🍊🍌🥬🫐🍆
You should of used 🍏
@@samstits8982 , "you should *have* used".
Please can you make one about the 100 years war? Love your video, it's pleasant to watch them all and also helps remind things forgotten
Ok these needs to be an series. Why is there a 5th Viking show starting again when there’s so many more epics to tell
Worlds rarest thing : Getting a notification from Geo history
And, dear Ukrainians, whether you like it or not, the official date of the founding of Novgorod is considered to be 859, according to the first mention of the city in the late Nikon Chronicle (XVI century). In the Tale of Bygone Years, created in the 12th century, the city was first mentioned in 862. This is exactly the case in all official sources. Yes, the Novgorod that we see now was rebuilt later, according to various historical research. But again, it is known that before this there was a settlement on the Rurik Settlement, a little upstream of the Volkhov and closer to Lake Ilmen. Also, there is a theory that there was a settlement in the Peryn area, as evidenced by various archaeological finds from 5-8 centuries from different cultures, which suggests that even then trade was carried out on these lands
And what can you say about Kyiv celebrating 1500 years from the foundation in USSR in 1982?
It means that Kyiv is centuries older than Novgorod.
@@dddo3706 Kyiv was first mentioned in documents in 915, Novgorod in 859. What's the question? If we take all sorts of myths and legends as a source, then both cities are older, but we are talking about official sources and documents, right?
By the archeology, Novgorod was found in the second half of X century. The man in XII century simply couldn't know about dates in IX century. @@VerRoKka
@@VerRoKka official?) there are no official documents 😂 or you mean primary chronicle is official document😂? Yeah sure. Find me any proof that Rurik existed. Then must be Kyi too. And Santa clause 🤣. And by the way if you open any encyclopedia it's says Kyiv founded in 482. So yes, Kyiv is older than Novgorod 😊
Its very important. Please translate:
Я недавно был в россии.
И так, что удалось выяснить по России и русским:
- Что меня удивило.... Русские сознательно отказываются от благ цивилизации. И бравируют этим. Они прямо в лицо говорят, что мне не нужен ваш мерседес, я хочу ездить на машине отечественного производства. А интернет мы свой построим.
- всю жизнь русских держали в скотском состоянии. И вдруг появилось окно возможностей ярко прожить последние 5-10 дней и умереть в окопе в кругу побратимов. Поэтому они еще долго будут идти убивать. Эта самая большая беда для Украины. И главная мотивация русских. Это необходимо понимать.
- русские искренне хотят стереть американцев с лица Земли и радуются их любой неудаче.
- русские мечтают дойти до пролива Ла-Манш
- Русские хотят уничтожить украинцев. Вначале войны они говорили что хотят просто проучить, как старший брат наказать младшего за непослушание. Теперь русские собираются воевать до тех пор, пока Украина не перестанет быть пригодной для жизни. Возможны временные передышки для набора сил.
- Путин был обычным вором. Императором его сделал русский народ, а не пропаганда.
- Сегодня русские недовольны только тем, что Путин до сих пор не применил ядерное оружие.
- Даже если Украина освободит все свои территории война не закончится. Решить проблему можно только развалом России, чтобы понизить градус имперского величия. Факт - в Европе не понимают на сколько велик этот градус.
- Русские готовы терпеть десятки лет любые лишения (ЛЮБЫЕ), лишь бы Украина жила плохо.
- Усиление сепаратистских настроений внутри России не приведет к результату. Даже в национальных республиках имперское величие на первом месте. Например в той же Башкирии массам плевать на национальную идентичность. Да и в Казани то же. На митинги они идут только потому что хотят на время почувствовать себя людьми. Но чего то серьезного от них не ждите.
- во все времена, всякого рода иностранных авантюристов привлекала Россия. Много ли сегодня таких компаний, которые готовы поставлять в русский Рейх любые товары? ДЕСЯТКИ ТЫСЯЧ. И что прикажете с этим делать?
- Запад верит, что русские хотят свободы. Это не просто ошибочное суждение. Это опасное заблуждение. Ответственно заявляю, что подавляющее большинство не хотят.
- в США люди живут в стереотипах и мифах о "хорошем народе" и плохом президенте, романтизируя русскую культуру и не понимая, что русская культура - это ФАСАД, за которым скрываются потемкинские деревни.
- В США не понимают, что государства Россия уже нет, есть криминальные группировки, которые делят воровской "общаг" и у которых в собственности около 100 000 000 поголовья скота.
- Русские не могут дать ничего этому миру. Поэтому ни хотят его уничтожить
- Жены мобилизованных играют не последнюю роль, мотивируя своих свинособак пойти на войну и сдохнуть в окопе. "Ты что не мужик"? - похрюкивают свиноматки.
- Не Путин убивал украинцев в Буче, Гостомеле, Ирпени, Мариуполе, а простые руские работяги, которых оправдывдывает русская оппозиция, сбежавшая на Запад и морочащая вам головы. Все независимые опросы подтверждают что русские поддерживают войну в Украине. Все - от детей средних классов до старых советских пенсионеров. Не из страха поддеерживают. Искренне поддерживают и всегда эб этом мечтали. Руссские улыбаются когда очередная ракета попадает в жилой дом в Украине.
- Русский - это не национальнсть, это состояние души абсолютного раба, готового исполнить любые преступные приказы. В любой стране есть люди с подобной ментальностью, скажете вы. Да. Только в России их не 8-12%, как в цивилизованных странах, а 85-89%.
- Оппозиция любит говорить что выборы в России были нечестными. Да, но если бы они были честными, то Путин набрал бы не меньше 75%. Он бы потерял голоса тех избирателей, которые считают Путина достаточно мягким.
That time you shoot someones ashes through a canon
Really looking forward to see what author has to say about Southern part of Rus. Also there is so much missing information about Cossacs autonomy, who they were and how they really influenced history of neighboring states.
Как говорят украинцы: казаки - это часть истории Украины, а не Руси. К Руси они не имеют никакого отношения💁
@@ericingefara4179 The word Cossack itself is of non-Slavic origin and most likely has a Khazar origin, not a Turkic one. Cossacks were a separate phenomenon in the south of Russia and adopted many of the practices of nomadic tribes, and in some part they themselves consisted of descendants and people of non-Slavic origin. In general, Ukrainians did not exist at all before.
@@ruldali615 я это знаю) казаки - это ославянившиеся потомки азиатских кочевых племен, это не секрет. Вся их культура - от полукочевого образа жизни и до элементов одежды - осталась с тех времён, когда они были половцами, татарами и печенегами
@@ericingefara4179 Тогда причем тут украина?
@@ruldali615 word Cosaacs is given to UKRANIAN people by Khasars or Tatars and mining free person. Because they indeed free runaways from both polish Lithonian commonwealth as well dictatorship of Russias kings. They spoke UKRAINIAN language, had UKRAINIAN schools, and even universities. First constitution in Europe was Pilip Orlik cossacs constitution.
Have you made a sequel to this, covering 1613 to the present? This is very good.
ruclips.net/video/kjDjnhOzqIU/видео.html
Many slaves from Eastern Europe rose to high office as slave officials in Byzantium and in the Ottoman empire . Others became soldiers , workers and artisans . Many Slavic women became concubines . Nomads from Central Asia regularly raided Slavic areas for slaves until states developed .
How about a series of videos about the conquests of Rome or Alexander the Great? This will provide a huge number of views.
this makes me wanna play total war Atilla medieval mod : )
Attila was a turkic guy, by the way.
I wish there was a larger picture of history... something putting larger context & scale to the European/Asian map...
The Mongol Empire
The English colonial Empire
Alexander the Great
Napoleon
The Roman Empire
The Byzantine Empire
This History segment show small portions of the tapestry that is History.
I'd love to see one that puts all of the major players in color at once... calling back to details described in greater clarity in this videos.
Anyone else want to see the Mongol Empire & Alexander the Great's campaign displayed to the same scale...?
let's not forget the Hungarians ... who took part in the founding of Kievian Rus .... by / ÁLMOS /a "Sleepy" leader .... Hungarians played a crucial role in this. ....
Basically you would need to include Sweden, Poland, Hungary, Otoman Empire, Mongols and half of the Balkans
This is interesting. I feel the question on the "Origin of Things", especially life is pointless, and with history is challenging as we don't know but tend to speculate, especially further back we go. What is useful are the ruins that people built with might and power, way more then us. However, they got ruined because they wrong themselves. We are no invincible as they decay is obvious. Man learned anything form history? Yes, but never heed!
Indeed.
For 30 years, the Russian Federation used the new technologies of the West for its militarization. The prolongation of the war and the gradual capture of new territories strengthens the idea of "Great Russia" in the hearts of Russians. The idea of "great Russia" will forever supplant the idea of the truth of Western values of tolerance and new technologies, without satellite-corrected point strikes on the locations of Russian troops, there will be no victory for the Western countries.
This is not 1918, there will be no revenge in 100 years.
As a resident of Russia, I will say that the most interesting thing begins after Peter the Great. You can shoot a saga there.
Как жителю России, тебе следовало бы сказать, что видео - полное говно
@@кто-н6ф Не-то чтоб полное говно, но дохуя моментов опущено... На 3 с минусом экскурс 🤷♂
Country with the name - Muscovy, Tsar Peter renamed "Russia" only in the 18th century, in 1721.
The Moksha tribe named their river Moscow, and the translation of this name, from the language of Moksha, sounds like “dirty water”. Any other languages of the world cannot translate the word Moscow. The word “kremlin” is Tatar and means fortifications on a hill.
In the Middle Ages, all the cartographers of Europe wrote and drew the border of Europe along the borders of Rus (Rus is the territory of present-day Ukraine). Muscovy - the ulus, with its Finnish peoples, has always been a component of the Horde, and Europe rightly attributed it to Asia.
This is an impressive video the way you include so much information in such an accessible way.
I love the year-counter at the top. Like a calendar.
let's not forget the Hungarians ... who took part in the founding of Kievian Rus .... by / ÁLMOS /a "Sleepy" leader .... Hungarians played a crucial role in this. ....
much info with NO PROOF
This is hell of a good game of thrones material
Tatar, also spelled Tartar, any member of several Turkic-speaking peoples that collectively numbered more than 5 million in the late 20th century and lived mainly in west-central Russia along the central course of the Volga River and its tributary, the Kama, and thence east to the Ural Mountains. The Tatars are also settled in Kazakhstan and, to a lesser extent, in western Siberia.
Wait tartars and TAtars were the same ethnic group?
I miss the original voiceover guy. His accent was very soothing.
Yes
@Jasper Smith Not entitled at all, just said I missed the original guy. I made no demands or complaints.
Ivan called himself Cesar, cuz his grandmother was a Byzantine princess, member of the Imperial Palaiologos family.
Враньё, слово Царь было ещё в Китае, так раньше более 4 тысячи лет назад называли себя императоры. Потом это слово перешло на запад. А так как русский народ древнее западных, поэтому оно у нас появилось раньше, чем у запада. Цезарь и Царь разные слова
Palaiologos family, our last Greek kings. The bloodline ended with them. The remaining, the last Komninos fled to Corsica when dirty Ottomans were hunting down every last royal bloodline. Komninos took the name Kalimeris in Corsica to avoid being spotted. There's a strong theory which says he married a Corsican woman, and they produced Napoleon Bonaparte. The word "Kalimeris" in Greek literally means "Buonaparte" translated in Italian. We will never know for sure, though. What we do know is, Napoleon was fond of the Greeks. He was sleeping with Arrian's book at his head, Alexander the Great's biography. When Napoleon later requested a small patch of forestry land from Greece, Greeks replied "No". Napoleon wasn't eager to retaliate. It reinforces the idea he might knew that perhaps he was half-Greek himself.
@@ВладимирСередюк-у4й а че 3? 6 миллионов же.
@Максимъ Остапенко суть не меняет , что это не от Цезаря пошло, а уже давно цари есть и ни кто не знает достоверность истории, если даже сейчас видим, что каждый свой пишет, а история народов живущих на русских землях более 8 тысяч лет из-за дат памятников и пирамид, с которыми можем сами в живую ознакомиться, как и с подземными городами и проходами в нашей стране. А также глядя на это и куча факторов, видим, что история официальная лживая, написана на коленки, как и про космос сказка для тупых, люди на этих сказках зарабатывают деньги))
@@ВладимирСередюк-у4й Kyiv founded in 482. Novgorod founded almost 400 YEARS LATER in 859. Moscow founded in 1147. RuZZia is not that old.
5:51 The Bolghar people are not Bulgarians. They're Bulgars, they are another state that splintered from the dissolution of Great Old Bulgaria. However, the Bulgars that arrived at the Danube and what then became Bulgaria are not the same people. The Bulgars were the ruling minority in a country predominantly settled by Greeks, Slavs, Thracians, etc., and with time due to intermixing the line was blurred at some point and the minorities got absorbed into the vast Slav majority. However, the Volga Bulgars were just that, Bulgars. Not Bulgarians.
there are many things that are simplified, under-discussed or erroneous.
Rooss is more fragmented than it was shown on the map, there were tribes and cities to hell, this is not considering the nomads. Novgorod most likely already existed, but was captured by the Normans, in the records of Byzantium they appear as areas from which raids took place. Kiev was conquered by the Ruriks from relatives. Local princes were elected according to the Norman format. Everyone is simplifying that there was originally a monarchy. Byzantium and the dynasty could have tried to erase pagan history. According to the stone buildings, degradation can be traced after baptism.
Lithuanian Orthodoxy was largely secured by the territories captured from Russia, their later reconquest was further secured by the subsequent uprisings.
It can be assumed that the campaign of Ermak had parallels with the campaign of Cortes, local tribes, already erased in history, were terrorized by the Tatars. They easily obeyed, but Kuchum's troops were constantly stuck on the border and waiting for the Cossacks to withdraw.
If we compare Ivan's madness with European kings, then he will act like an angel here..
They are Turkish and speak in Turkish languages
@@smitkarl Turkic and Turkish are two different things.
@@Ne0LiT maybe in English I make mistake, but I'm Krim-Tatar turkish and I'm understanding in Turkish, in Kazakhstan, in AzerbaijanTurkish, in Turkmens, in Tatars, Bulgars, Uyghurs,.....
the whole video pretty much incorrect.
What an amazing information tool it should be instilled in every school for a number of different cultures I find it hard to believe that nobody has ever suggested this or that this is not something that is attempted to be implemented in the school systems. Although I do actually know why that would not be the case it's just a shame that it is what it is.
Unfortuantely, this video is filled with historically-incorrect information. You can see many issues with it being pointed-out in the comments. Here's one point I've pointed out:
Oleg didn't 'found the Kievan Rus', and Kievan Rus isn't a historical term. It's a term that was created by 18th-century Russian historians to refer to the part of Russia's history that was centred around Kiev. In its day, what's today often called "Kievan Rus" was instead called "the lands of Rus", which means "the lands of Russia" - "Russia" being the latin phrasing of Rus.
And the kingdom that's being called "Kievan Rus" didn't originate and wasn't founded in Kiev, but began in Novgorod, which was the first capital of that kingdom. When Oleg conquered Kiev, he didn't create a new kingdom, but expanded the lands of Rus to include Kiev. And then he moved Rus' captial from Novgorod to Kiev. The conquering and capitalising of Kiev wasn't the founding of Oleg's kingdom or a historical state, it was the expanding of one that already existed.
"Kievan Rus" is a later abstraction of a historical time-period, and isn't a kingdom or a physical thing. So, saying that Oleg founded something that's an abstraction is a pretty ignorant, ahistorical claim.
@@thischannel1071 Actually it was other way around. Term "Kieven Rus" was used actually by non-Russian shoolars in Russia, to distinguish part what was shared between them and other East Slavs. If it would be just Russian history, then there would be no point in adding that.
And no, it doesn't mean land of "Russia". It mean, land of Rus so basically land of oar people. In reference to Swed's who created they principles there, trading with Constantinople (at the same time Wends around Vistula, created powerful tribal union). Initially Swed's created Novgorod, what was later part of Hanseatic League and sized large Fino-Ugric lands. And later captured Kviv from Khazar's, what become new capital. Moscow wasn't founded until 12'th century, shortly after that Rus fall to Mongol invasion. Ending Nordic presence in the region.
From that point majority of Rus land is sized by Lithuania, what later become part of powerful union with West Slavs. While Golden Orde control treacherous Moscow as puppet state, who become rich enforcing tributes in name of Khan. Some time later they lead to collapse to of Novgorod and size they vast Fino-Ugric lands. Around same time Golden Orde also collapse and is subjugated by they vassals.
In 16'th century, Ivan the Terrible self proclaim himself as ruler of all "Ruxians" what ever it mean? What lead to his conflict with Polish-Lithuania Commonwealth. Who actually were also rulers of majority of Rus people (in so called Cossac Ukraine). In the end Tzardom (title also stolen from Bulgaria, as Moscow never did have contact with Byzantium, fighting with Ottomans for token part of they land. So Crimea) is defeated and Moscow is taken.
Unfortunately German prince from Oldenberg family is elected as new Tzar and after defeat of Poland, abomination known as Russian Empire is formed. Some time later head of rouge Polish state of Prussia become Emperor of Holly Roman Empire and Habsburgs also spread like wildfire. As result of alliance between German nobility (at the same time Prussian princess Catherine II the Great become Tzar). Democratic Commonwealth is defeated and tear apart (after Saxons, who competed with Prussians, lost control over the realm).
Rest of history is more known.
@@TheRezro Again, what I wrote is correct - the term Kievan Rus' was coined by Russian historians. The history of Russia, which includes the history of Rus, involves many peoples. The term Kievan Rus' was not about identifying territory of specific ethnic groups, but about identifying the territory included in the political entity that was under Rus / Russian rule.
Regarding this: "And no, it doesn't mean land of "Russia". It mean, land of Rus so basically land of oar people." You're saying that "lands of Rus" means lands of Rus. But a phrase doesn't mean itself - it is itself. What a phrase or word means is what it's equivalent to. Russia is the Latin phrasing of Rus, and so "lands of Rus" and "lands of Russia" are the equivalent phrase, and one means the other.
The word Rus, and therefore Russia in Latin, means "people who row". So, you can say that "lands of Rus" means both "lands of Russia" and "lands of people who row", because the phrase "lands of Rus" is equivalent to either. For the point of my post, I was showing the connection between Rus and Russia, that they're the same word just in two different languages, and why Russia has -sia added.
@@thischannel1071 Except Russians didn't exactly rule Rus people. Whole thing was mostly Imperialist projection of Ivan the Tribe, later fallowed by German Tzars. It is why claiming history of Rus as "Russian" is plain wrong. Russians being bastard child of Slavs and Mongols, try ethnically cleans other Rus people (and Slavs in general). It is why your argument doesn't really make sense. Kieven was added to distinguish historically different center then Muscovy. That all about it.
@@thischannel1071 You must clearly understand that the first sloltsa of Rus' is the Ladoga region and the ancient city of Ladoga (but this is closer to the settlement of the Vikings who lived where there were trade routes by water) Then the capital became Novgorod. Rus' came from it. and then Kyiv was crowned Prince of Novgorod. Overlay maps in Photoshop and don’t lie to others, the northern part of Russia is Rus. The word rus is not the Greek word Rus (this is a river, river bed or rowers from Gothic). Russia is the Greek style of the name of Rus'. The Greek Church influenced Rus'.
Who made this map? Where livonians are placed, there were estonians, and the western coast of lake Peipus did not belong to Novgorod after 1061
and was Novgorod subjected to the Mongol Empire?
@@BiglerSakura indeed they were, though the mongols never conquered them, but Novgorod was subject for taxes
Estonians didn't have any state by then, Livonians is not reffered to a nation's name, but rather to an independent state.
@@Arkturbettel Thank you, but i am referring to 5:11, in which time there was no Livonian state (nor any state in that regard). Actually, there never was a Livonian state either, but a mix of different states ruled by bishops and Teutonic Order.
@@Arkturbettel николашка, ты тоже не имел никакого государства, это вас мордву имели пришлые татары, а в дальнейшем немцы.