Jump to content

[History] Ancient Russia


tao

Recommended Posts

The early history of Russia, like those of many countries, is one of migrating peoples and ancient kingdoms. In fact, early Russia was not exactly "Russia," but a collection of cities that gradually coalesced into an empire. I n the early part of the ninth century, as part of the same great movement that brough the Danes to England and the Norsemen to Western Europe, a Scandanavian people known as the Varangians crossed the Baltic Sea and landed in Eastern Europe. The leader of the Varangians was the semilegendary warrior Rurik, who led his people in 862 to the city of Novgorod on the Volkhov River. Whether Rurik took the city by force or was invited to rule there, he certainly invested the city. From Novgorod, Rurik's successor Oleg extended the power of the city southward. In 882, he gained control of Kiev, a Slavic city that had arisen along the Dnepr River around the 5th century. Oleg's attainment of rule over Kiev marked the first establishment of a unified, dynastic state in the region. Kiev became the center of a trade route between Scandinavia and Constantinople, and Kievan Rus', as the empire came to be known, flourished for the next three hundred years.

 

By 989, Oleg's great-grandson Vladimir I was ruler of a kingdom that extended to as far south as the Black Sea, the Caucasus Mountains, and the lower reaches of the Volga River. Having decided to establish a state religion, Vladimir carefully considered a number of available faiths and decided upon Greek Orthodoxy, thus allying himself with Constantinople and the West. It is said that Vladimir decided against Islam partly because of his belief that his people could not live under a religion that prohibits hard liquor. Vladimir was succeeded by Yaroslav the Wise, whose reign marked the apogee of Kievan Rus'. Yaroslav codified laws, made shrewd alliances with other states, encouraged the arts, and all the other sorts of things that wise kings do. Unfortunately, he decided in the end to act like Lear, dividing his kingdom among his children and bidding them to cooperate and flourish. Of course, they did nothing of the sort.

 

Within a few decades of Yaroslav's death (in 1054), Kievan Rus' was rife with internecine strife and had broken up into regional power centers. Internal divisions were made worse by the depradations of the invading Cumans (better known as the Kipchaks). It was during this time (in 1147 to be exact) that Yuri Dolgorukiy, one of the regional princes, held a feast at his hunting lodge atop a hill overlooking the confluence of the Moskva and Neglina Rivers. A chronicler recorded the party, thus providing us with the earliest mention of Moscow, the small settlement that would soon become the pre-eminent city in Russia.

 

If interested, please read about Russian history from ancient times to Soviet era  < here >.

 

Ancient Russia | The Mongols & the Emergence of Moscow | The Romanovs |
Napoleon's Invasion | The Path to Revolution | The Soviet Era

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Replies 13
  • Views 949
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Everything is great, but what is the purpose of this topic and why is necessary it to be published in this forum.
Is this somehow related to the main topics of this forum? Or what is the purpose of this post? Is it politics or what it is?

Link to comment
Share on other sites


10 minutes ago, Kalju said:

... what is the purpose of this topic and why is necessary it to be published in this forum

What is the purpose of 1 ft snow in NewFoundLand today?  It happened.  And it is.

 

The post is on the forum now -- in an off-topic area.  Believe that no justification is required to post it -- in a moderated forum.. 

 

Make whatever of it?  Read (informative about the history of one of countries with biggest land mass), ignore, ask an administrator to delete it, complain, or just shoot breeze.

 

Believe or not?: Why of anything I don't know! 

 

With friendliness, respect, and comradery:flowers:

Link to comment
Share on other sites


Yeah, I read it, but I have this little mistake that I know all this before.
Moreover, this review is very primitive and focused, it's a specifix and not fully true. That's the problem.

Simply to say, this is not something what to believe.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


2 hours ago, Kalju said:

... not fully true.

Pray tell us what is not true so we can have a friendly informative discussion.  I am not an expert on Russian history or any other history.  But my interests, training, and vocation is in conducting research.  In fact research progresses more when ideas are challenged rather than just accepted (or rejected).  So your ideas that point to contrary facts are most welcome.

Thank you.   :flowers:

Link to comment
Share on other sites


@Kalju: Are u being a cat again?

2 hours ago, Kalju said:

Moreover, this review is very primitive and focused, it's a specifix and not fully true. That's the problem.

 

Once again very "general speaking" ...

Is your point of view not the same and u felt the need to set the record straight according to u?

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites


knowledge-Spammer

i am sure not one of u will watch  but maybe it helps understand

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites


4 minutes ago, knowledge said:

... sure not one of u will watch...

Sorry @Knowledge to prove you wrong  :lol: I'm watching it right now and plan to watch it to the end.  Much obliged for the video.  Thank you!

Link to comment
Share on other sites


knowledge-Spammer
5 minutes ago, Kalju said:

Why not, everything that happened before current moment is history. 

i watch 1st 10mins of video its just haters on putin and talks about how much money he have and all the bad things people think he did  i can tell u your history  is off  do not be tricked to think things like that  from people who just hate on russia and putin  the more hate putin get the more we love him

y people have to much big thing about russia and putin  its  real sad u people think like that  make me sad to have to read  and see much hate all times

Link to comment
Share on other sites


Yes, Sir! it's a horrible, what propaganda can do with a simple person.

It is really good that You have so "Good lord", but around is so bad world... who don't understand, that You are so happy!

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites


This thread seems to have started with the formation of pre-modern Russia and ended up in a debate over the merits of Vladimir Putin? That doesn't really make much sense, as one has almost nothing to do with the other. There is a reason why contemporary issues are usually avoided in proper historical research - everything that's passed may technically be history, but the question is whether that increases or decreases our understanding of things. Generally speaking, we, as contemporaries to various events only have access to a very partial impression of things, because we are invested in our own time and the issues of our world. As contemporaries, we tend not to search for evidence and arguments, and usually prefer to go by our feelings. Even when evidence exists, and we do find it, in such matters, there is always the question of bias - evidence today is too plentiful, and its credibility too uncertain. At that point, it's up to each individual to gauge the evidence he has been able to find, in an attempt to construct a reasoned argument - and most people just don't bother. 

 

This has little to do with any singular political issue of the day. Here, it's Putin, and somewhere else it might be Obama, Bush, Clinton. A prime historical example would be Napoleon - to some in his time he was a hero, a liberator and genius, to others a tyrant, bully, madman, butcher, etc. Today, when we are detached from the issue, we can calmly analyse the credibility of sources, map various global phenomena and try to see how Napoleon's actions made sense in his time, what is attributable to the Zeitgeist,  and what is due to himself alone. The same will inevitably happen to notable figures from our present, in due course, because that is what separates proper historical research from reportage, news, columns, random political posts on Reddit, Twitter, Youtube and TV documentaries with undisclosed research, etc. This doesn't mean that all these things won't or cannot be used as research material later on - they can, and most certainly will. But it's important to realise that this doesn't mean that they signify the truth, only the perceptions of those who were in the thick of things.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites


54 minutes ago, Alanon said:

... it's important to realise that this doesn't mean that they signify the truth ...

Well said (much thanks for a well thought-out and well written article, which is a rarity on these fora!).  This is the reason for the existence and the need for scholarship, research, and more importantly -- judgment.  Thank you.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


Some off topic posts removed.

 

Russia is a great country, and many people would like to know its history., so please focus on the subject and forget about politics.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • 4 weeks later...

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...