In the front top pocket of my backpack I have a small case for a small camera. At one time, it was purchased just for the fire. And in it:
A piece of flint... I must say that flint is extremely rare in nature in our area. They say you can find it on the mounds near the railroad. Or in heaps of rubble... I have never found one, however. In other words, it is better to carry flint with you prepared in advance. So, flint. There was a forged chair for him. You can break the file, of course. But a forged chair is more aesthetically pleasing). Tinder in an airtight jar. I have tinder fungus prepared using technology) And a little jute cord in a zip bag. And a ferocerium rod from our narrow-eyed brothers fit into the heap.
Well, as a strategic reserve in case it’s damp or the grass is wet, I make a nest out of toilet paper. Then I inflate it.
The supply of tinder is hidden in the cupboard. When I prepared it I made extra. Enough for many fires. If necessary, the supply in the backpack is replenished from the cupboard.
And the case itself wanders through the pockets of the backpack, leaving it only for use or replenishment. It is used in practice all this for the sake of showing people. Show off in one word.
Point two: fire from the sun.
The essence of making fire from the sun is to focus the sun's ray on the tinder. For example, melting a lens from ice, or fastening two bottle bottoms with resin and filling them with water, or polishing the bottom of a beer can, or breaking off the reflector of a flashlight... We also obtained a reflector from a car headlight. Three reflectors were stolen from us) hidden in the forest))
Or you can buy a magnifying glass. It costs mere pennies. Or a solar lighter on Ali. It's even cheaper! Well, throw it in your backpack. What if...
Point three: what if everything is screwed up. There is no sun at all. All that remains is to make fire by friction. Everything here is simple and complicated at the same time!
Every year we perform a ritual of fire renewal. It is by friction that we produce living fire. And therefore I have an appropriate set for such a case.
In natural conditions, you just need to take two boards, make a drill, a beam, a stop under your hand and saw) Simply...
In fact, whether a coal falls out or not depends on many conditions. Tested in practice. The first time, for example, I spent a month trying to make a fire on the balcony. I made a pine drill. I tried almost every day for a month until I realized that when heated, resin was released! and this resin prevents the coal from working. I had to try it outside in the snow. The ember did not fall out. Apparently because of the humidity... Well, and all sorts of nuances.
Moreover, the lining under the arm gets hot and burns. Excess smoke in the eyes and discomfort)
Therefore, another cheat to make life easier)
The bearing is integrated into the lining. There is virtually no friction and it is much more comfortable to hold.
You can, however, use a lace as a string or make a rope out of clothes. But it’s more practical to put a roll of paracord in your backpack just in case. Paracord does not stretch and wear out less.
Point four. For dessert)
Chemical method of making fire)
Well, I couldn’t play with stray things for fire and not get fire) That’s why I dug up manganese in my wife’s medicine cabinet.
We assume that in our forest conditions it is in our first aid kit. We take sticks to make fire by friction... Or we simply cut a notch in any wood. Place some manganese in the recess. It is important that everything is dry!!!
Add a little sugar. We have sugar in our meal kit! The ratio is approximately 8 parts manganese to one part sugar.
We put in what we need to catch fire. I have the notorious jute.
Using a “drill” or a sharpened stick, forcefully rub the manganese with sugar. We hear a click and see how fire appears.
As a result of the chemical reaction, quite a lot of heat is released. This is enough to light cotton wool or jute wool. But the reaction happens very quickly! Therefore, the ignition must be started immediately!
And, to summarize all of the above, it should be noted that setting yourself difficult tasks. Making fire not in the most traditional ways, for example. very interesting! Fascinating and useful! But it’s more correct and smart to be prepared or prepare in advance!
PS: out of all this, I personally most often use a lighter) Sometimes matches. And I also have a supply of them)
Well, and knives too)
In the forest, Vicks moves into your pocket, Bars into your belt, and Machetina rides on your backpack)
The local militia almost completely fled. Mercenaries also run like cockroaches. The Russian military personnel and Cossacks, who are one-third GRU specialists, are fighting ours. Their task is not so much to fight as to destroy infrastructure. They enter into military clashes only if they have a serious numerical advantage over our battalions; if there is no serious advantage, then they retreat. This does not mean that our people there are like at a resort. They fight really well and beautifully.
There are chances that the main phase of the war will end in a few weeks, unless Putin pulls some trick. But guerrilla warfare can drag on for a long time. Perhaps 2-3 years. To stop the partisan movement in the Donbass, all locals who will support this evil will have to be evicted. The current Ukrainian elite is not capable of such measures, so in order to end the war in Donbass, they will have to change too.
Smoke
One of the most important factors that led to the actual defeat of Luganda was the lack of smoking in cities occupied by rebels and Russian militants. Of course, they don’t like Ukraine there, but in order to give up smoking for the sake of a war with Ukraine, they are in no way ready for such feats. So if your plans include starting an uprising in some industrial zone, remember, in addition to weapons, you need a lot of smoke. Girkin did not seem to take this fact into account, for which he will be hanged.
Get up at 4 am and wait for the punishers
The main entertainment in the villages is to get up at 4 am, sit on a pile and wait for the punishers. The people are very intimidated. They are very surprised when punishers bring sausages instead of gallows. The army of Luganda, if God forbid it had reached Kyiv and Lvov, it would have erected gallows. And then there’s a break in the pattern of punishers with sausages. However, do not think that this somehow reduces the degree of hatred towards Ukraine. The old wisdom about the wolf, which is useless to feed, works here and will work flawlessly.
A question worse than Hamlet's
- Why are they bothering us?
This refers to Ukrainian troops. Almost everyone asks this question in one variation or another.
— We don’t want Ukraine!
- There is no need to free us!
- Leave us alone! We don't want to go to Ukraine!
Like little children, they do not understand why the Ukrainian army does not allow the activities of terrorist organizations in Donbass. They don’t understand because the minds of children are in their heads. And not just children, but mentally retarded children. It’s cruel, but you can’t erase the words from the song. The main problem of Donbass is the lack of basic worldly intelligence.
It is necessary for someone from the leadership of Ukraine to explain to these people that the Ukrainian army is coming to liberate not them, but Ukrainians and Ukrainian lands. They should also explain that they cannot build Novorossiya on the territory of Ukraine and run around with a Kalashnikov assault rifle and a Colorado ribbon on their ass. This behavior is dangerous to property and life. There is a beautiful city of Moscow, go there and build.
People's moods
I warn you right away that no one measured the numbers, so they are purely arbitrary, in my subjective opinion. Moreover, Donbass is still different.
About 30 percent are ethnic Russians who don’t give a damn about anything. They are ready to destroy the entire Donbass if only there would be no Ukraine there. It is very easy to identify ethnic Russians - they are the most aggressive, zombified, and the hatred against Ukraine there is simply wild.
Let me give you one example. I personally know one weakling who terribly hates Ukraine. The hatred is such that it frantically awaits a counterattack by the militants on Lutugino. And this despite the fact that her daughter and sister live in Lutugino. Imagine all the idiocy of this aunt, who doesn’t even give a damn about her own daughter and sister. And there are a lot of them there. If someone tells you that the people there have seen the light, don’t believe it. There is nothing even close to this.
They are driven only by hatred of Ukraine. Therefore, appealing to logic is useless. Ideally, they should be resettled from there to Russia, because they themselves do not live and will not give life to other people.
There is another contingent that can roughly be called deceived fools. These people have already realized that they were simply deceived and they don’t want to go to Luganda anymore.
In general, I will give advice to those who worry about who says or thinks something, or estimates the percentages for or against Ukraine. My advice to you is to forget about them. The winner of the war is Ukraine, and the winner sets the rules. As we say, so it will be. If you don't like it, go out with your things.
How to understand these people
It’s very simple - these are typical migrant workers. The main thing is sausage, and the Motherland is in tenth place. In 1991, they betrayed Russia because Ukraine had more sausage. In 2014, they also betrayed Ukraine, because in Russia the pension is higher. They will betray again and again. Nobody needs such citizens, not even Putin. And Ukraine will be a complete fool if it warms these vipers on its chest again.
Many Ukrainians are perplexed why not do something simple: If you don’t love the country, just leave it. Russia is big, there is a lot of space, there is also enough work.
But it's not that simple. For 20 years, anti-Ukrainian bastards have hammered into their heads the thesis that there is no Ukraine and Donbass is a purely Russian land, and they are the masters there, and the Ukrainians are nobody there at all.
And it must be said that Ukraine has been silent all these 20 years and has not refuted these allegations in any way. The authorities most often turned a blind eye to such rhetoric. What was regarded as consent there. And now here's an unexpected turn. For 20 years, evil spirits ruled there, and Ukraine turned a blind eye to it, and now troops have entered.
The local lumpen, who for the most part is not much different from the movie character Sharikov, sincerely believes that Donbass is Russia, not Ukraine. And it is almost impossible to convince them, and it is not necessary.
The reason for hatred of Ukraine
Ethnic Russians are sowing hatred of Ukraine in Donbass. But what kind of Russians are they? Katsapye bast shoes. Actually, they hate everyone, everywhere. Having annexed the Caucasus by force, they hate Caucasians and shout the slogan Russia - only for Russians. You really can’t understand them with your mind. Such a people have nothing but hatred in them. It so happened that they live in our house and they hate us Ukrainians, the rightful owners of this house.
It is wrong to try to negotiate with them or try to appease them in some way. They will never change again. They will continue to sow hatred towards Ukraine, wait for Putin, vote for anti-Ukrainian parties and do all possible nasty things for our country.
There is only one solution to this problem - to evict this brat from Ukraine. It's not difficult to do this. At their core, they are all earners. If there is no work, they will leave. There is work in Russia - that’s where they will go.
Ukraine should deprive this entire population of citizenship, and stateless persons should not be given the right to work. Without work, they will go to their Russia and everything will be fine. Both for us and for them.
Of course, there will be a lot of screaming and snot about human rights violations. But after what Russia did in Donbass, I am sure that the entire civilized world will be happy if it is possible to separate the two warring parties into different apartments.
I am confident that this idea will be supported by the majority of Ukrainians. All that remains is to get the authorities to implement this plan.
In my first article, I would first of all like to write about the view of the world around me. By studying psychology, a person begins to look at the world around him differently. Everything that previously seemed wrong or incomprehensible to him takes on completely different shapes. Many previously established stereotypes seem ridiculous and unfounded. And this is normal, since a person begins to acquire sober thinking. I will try to use language that is understandable to most people and to explain as briefly as possible the picture of the world in which we live.
First of all, I want to draw your attention to the upbringing of a person from his very birth. What is typical for most parents who have small children? This is education through prohibitions, this is not possible, that is not possible, and so on. The child develops restrictive thinking, which then haunts him throughout his life.
Further, these restrictions are imposed by all subsequent social institutions - kindergarten, school, college and others, right up to the place of work and one’s own family. Accordingly, such a person will subsequently drill the same thing into his children, and they will hammer into theirs ad infinitum. All this will continue until someone cuts off this endless chain of moral teachings that make no sense.
I’m telling you that there are no restrictions or prohibitions in this life. They exist only for those who accept them and nothing more. The word “impossible” is a relative statement that says that one is not allowed, but another is allowed. It’s impossible, it’s wrong, I can’t - these are all also limiters inserted into our heads by society so that we would be subordinate to this society. Throw these restrictions out of your head, and you will see a completely different picture of the world, one in which everything is possible.
In the new picture of the world, you will see yourself as an omnipotent person who can do everything, who never makes mistakes, and for whom nothing is impossible. You cannot do wrong, you can do it with benefit for you, or without it, and that’s all. All those who tell you that you are doing wrong, thereby indicate that you are doing wrong in relation to their understanding of correctness, and therefore - their benefit, but not yours. And all mistakes are nothing more than lessons that need to be learned.
There is such a thing as a “sucker”, this is a person who pursues and panders to the interests of others, and not his own. We were taught to care for our neighbors, morality, moral behavior, those qualities that make us weak. We have always been taught the concept that good triumphs over evil. However, this is not so, and the world in which we have to live today is a world of disguised evil. But I would not call this evil, everything is quite fair and corresponds to the laws of nature, which has nothing to do with our beliefs. Therefore, in order to take a worthy place in this world, you must have a strong psyche, not bound by any restrictions or prohibitions.
The most interesting thing is that in human society weaknesses are indulged. Unreasonable parents coddle their already mentally weak children, interfering in their personal lives. All this makes us weaker. And there is no one to protect the weak except himself. This whole illusion of security and stability, which is supposedly present in our supposedly civilized society, blinds us and does not allow us to see reality.
This is why people are sometimes surprised by obvious things and cannot understand why what happened happened when it seemed like it shouldn’t have happened. I'm telling you, there is no stability, no security, no civilization. There is a savage society teetering on the edge of madness. This society is manageable only when it experiences fear, but as soon as it feels permissiveness, it begins to destroy everything in its path.
This world is merciless to the weak, in order to survive in it you simply need to be strong, and psychology gives such strength. The right psychological attitude will make you invincible and indestructible. This is called fortitude, which is based on the internal mental state. Study psychology, it will open your eyes to reality, help you become stronger, help you become the captain of your ship called life.
As any Ukrainian patriot knows, Ukrainians founded the Roman and Byzantine Empires, built pyramids for the Egyptians, dug up the Black Sea, invented the Sanskrit language for backward Indians, and gave humanity teachers Jesus and Buddha. Everything is so magnificent... Is there any exaggeration here? When did the first Ukrainians appear on Earth?
The article was written to cast a sobering glance at the antiquity of the Ukrainian nation, to enlighten those who are not in the know. First, let’s give the floor to Oles Buzina:
“If you take a look at the map of modern Ukraine, it turns out that it is full of incomprehensible names. Below, Crimea, donated by the generous uncle Khrushchev, dangles like a big pear. Rivers flow from north to south with names that are unintelligible to the Slavic ear - Danube, Dniester, Don and Donets. In the west rises the wooded ridge of the Carpathians with the mysterious Hoverla, where President Yushchenko loved to run for inspiration. In the east beyond the Kuban there is the Caucasus, where, as in the time of Lermontov, “an angry Chechen crawls to the shore, sharpening his dagger.” And only in the north are the words understandable - Pripyat, Stokhod, Goryn - small quiet rivers making their way through the dull Polesie. It turns out that non-Slavic peoples once lived in the south and west of Ukraine before us?
Yes, that’s exactly what happens, gentlemen! ...
The Slavs began writing in the 9th century. It was invented by Cyril and Methodius, adapting the Greek alphabet for local needs. Since then, the Slavs began to keep their own chronicles. But the previous millennium was also documented in detail by the Romans and Byzantines. ….
From Roman chronicles at the turn of the new era, we know that the Dacian tribe of carps lived in the Carpathians. Their modern closest relatives are the present-day Albanians. “Carpathians” was the name of the mountains in their language.
Ukraine itself was called Sarmatia, after the name of the most numerous and warlike of the tribes that lived here. Where, fifteen hundred years later, Taras Bulba and his sons would ride across the Wild Field, detachments of heavily armed Sarmatian horsemen in strong scaly armor roamed. Judging by the language, the Sarmatians were Iranians. It was they who gave the name to the Ukrainian rivers – Don, Donets and Danube. "Don" translated from Iranian means "water."
“It has long been noticed: as soon as our historian grabs hold of the events of the 2nd–4th centuries in Ukraine, he immediately begins to spew wonderful nonsense.
Everything before the 2nd century is clearer than ever. At first, the Cimmerians lived in our steppes. Then the Scythians turned them around. Then the Sarmatians came and drove out... the Scythians. But after the Sarmatians our “fatal” failure begins.
Having achieved it, the orthodox Slavic mind falls into inarticulate bleating about the “debatable affiliation” of the so-called Chernyakhov culture. ... Of course, it was not possible to hide all the loose ends in the muddy academic waters. Even in the school textbook on ancient history there is a mysterious episode. At the end of the 4th century, from beyond the Danube, the German tribe of Goths climbed onto the Roman Empire - straight from the Northern Black Sea region. On canoes and rafts, tens of thousands of these barbarians crossed the border that ran along this river and flooded Dacia - present-day Romania. And even in 378 they defeated the army of the Roman Emperor Valens near Adrianople...
But beyond the Danube, where the Goths came from, in this very Northern Black Sea region, is our current southern Ukraine. It turns out that the Germans lived here before the Ukrainians? Yes, gentlemen, this is exactly what happened in the 2nd–4th centuries.
The Goths, carefully described in Roman and Byzantine chronicles, originally lived in the north - in Scandinavia - Scandza. ... As the 6th century Gothic historian Jordan writes, from “Scanza, as from a womb that gives birth to tribes, the Goths came out with their king named Berig.” They were driven by hunger. ..."
The Gothic state reached its greatest size in the second half of the 4th century, when Germanaric ruled it. According to Jordan, this thug “has been compared in dignity by many ancient writers to Alexander the Great.” He managed to subjugate even those remote places where Moscow is now located, and in the early Middle Ages there lived the Finno-Ugric tribes Mordens (Mordovians), Merens (Merya) and Vasinabronki (all white).
Jordan also describes Germanarich’s campaign against the Wends - the early Slavs, who “although they were worthy of contempt because of the weakness of their weapons, were, however, powerful due to their numbers and tried to resist at first. But the great number of those unfit for war is worth nothing... They all submitted the power of Germanarich."
An echo of those times remained in the Scandinavian sagas that mention Danparstad, the capital of the Goths on the Dnieper. The hero of the “Song of Hled” preserved in the Elder Edda demands for himself “the famous forest that is called Myrkvid, sacred graves on Gothic land, a wonderful stone in the bends of Danpa, half of the chain mail that Heidrek had, lands and people, and shining rings.” Myrkvid - translated as Black Forest. It still exists on the right bank of the Dnieper above Zaporozhye. Even today it amazes with its size. By car you can drive through it in at least an hour. The stone in the Danpa bends is easily identified with the Dnieper rapids. As for Danparstad, some of the pre-revolutionary historians assumed that it preceded present-day Kyiv. Prince Kiy is the Gothic rex Kniva, supposedly well known from Jordan’s Getica.
Be that as it may, it was from the Goths that such words as “prince” (from the Gothic “kuni” - clan elder), “regiment” (“volk” - armed people, people), “helmet” (Gothic) penetrated into the Slavic languages “hilms”) and even “penyazi” - money (“pannings”). The last word is well known both to historians and to those who remember the modern German “pfenig” - one hundredth of a mark.
And yet, at the end of the 4th century, the Goths were driven out of Ukraine by a new terrible enemy - the Huns, who came from the Trans-Don steppes. “Germanaric, elderly and decrepit, suffered from a wound,” writes Jordan, “and, unable to bear the Hunnic raids, died at the one hundred and tenth year of his life. His death gave the Huns the opportunity to overpower those Goths who sat on the eastern side and were called Ostrogoths.” The Visigoths (“Western”) crossed the Danube and, fleeing the Huns, found a new homeland on the territory of the Roman Empire. They stopped only in Spain, where they formed the upper class of society and the royal dynasty.
But until the 15th century, a small Gothic principality existed in Crimea, destroyed only by the Turks. It was there that those “Gothic red maidens... on the shores of the blue sea” lived who rejoiced at the defeat of the Russians in “The Tale of Igor’s Campaign.”
The Italian Josaphat Barbaro, who traveled around Crimea in the 15th century, wrote in his diary: “beyond Caffa, along the bend of the coast on the great sea, is Gothia... The Goths speak German. I know this because my German servant was with me. They talked to him and completely understood each other, just as a Furlander and a Florentine would communicate.”
And even at the end of the 19th century, professors at Kyiv University St. Vladimir Yulian Kulakovsky will be amazed by the “Nordic” appearance of some mountain Tatars - apparently descendants of the Goths.
The name of Germanarich was forgotten. The name of Attila the Hun thundered. But who was he - a wild Asian nomad or a proud Slavic prince Bogdan Gatyl, as one witty Kiev writer wrote? ...
A cheerful picture of the “victory parade” of the Hun leader Attila was painted in the novel “The Sword of Ares” by the writer Ivan Bilyk. Released in 1972, the book caused quite a stir. The author portrayed the leader of a nomadic tribe of the 5th century, known from historical chronicles... as an ancient Russian prince, renaming him Bogdan Gatyl.
Out of fright, the rather stupid Kyiv officials did not come up with anything better than to see nationalism in this. Instead of introducing the “Sword of Ares” into the school curriculum, torturing children with it like Gonchar’s “Ensign Bearers,” it was removed from libraries. ….In 1990, in the wake of perestroika, Dnipro republished “The Sword of Ares”, since then over and over again one has heard: “Attila... is this Gatylo?”...
But what really?
“...His name can still be somehow remade into Gatylo, but how can we “glorify” his brother Bleda? And what to do with Attila’s dad, who was called by the “typical” Ukrainian name Mundzuk? And with uncles Oktar and Roas? And in the end, with a Mongolian eye shape and a thin beard, like facts about ancient Ukrainian ancestry?
The steppe then spoke a wild, unimaginable Surzhik, consisting of Hunnic, Germanic, Greek and, probably, Slavic words. ... But neither the appearance nor the name of Attila Mundzukovich gives rise to suspicion of even a drop of our blood in his veins.”
“By the 6th century, our ancestors multiplied so much that the Gothic historian Jordan, for the sake of scientific accuracy, divided them into two giant branches.” He mentions the names: Wends, Ants, Slavs
“In the third year after the death of Emperor Justin,” states the author of “Ecclesiastical History” John of Ephesus, “the cursed people of the Slavs moved, who passed through all of Hellas... They took many cities and fortresses; burned, robbed and conquered the country... They learned to wage war better than the Romans..."
Procopius of Caesarea, secretary of the Byzantine commander Belisarius, left a colorful description of the Slavic army.
They soon flooded all of Central and Southern Europe. In the west, their border was the foothills of the Alps and the Spree River, where Berlin is now, and in the south - the warm resort Adriatic coast. “For our sins, the Antes and Slavs are raging everywhere,” the same poor Jordan noted melancholy, hinting that there is no cure for this disease and is not expected in the near future.
Everything would be fine, but the Slavic princes don’t like to fight among themselves. Having captured half of Europe, they did not bother to create a single power and happily lived off the loot, tormenting each other in internecine clashes.
Retribution followed immediately. Gradually, the western tribes of the Slavs fell under the influence of the empire of Charlemagne, and the eastern tribes began to pay tribute to Khazaria, a predatory trading state on the Volga. ...
And then the Vikings appeared - those same stubborn fellows who mastered the path “from the Varangians to the Greeks.” The Eastern Slavs had a state without them. But the Varangians were the first to bring the idea of an empire - a superpower that welded all these Drevlyans, Polyans and Krivichi into mighty Rus' from the Carpathians in the West to the headwaters of the Volga in the East. They also gave the name - Rusichs, Rusyns, Russians - this is how the ancestors of modern East Slavic peoples were called until the 17th century.” ...
Note: there were no Ukrainians. There were small tribes of the Russian people
“To determine the boundaries of an ethnic group, there is a simple principle, which is based on the opposition “friends and strangers.” Every Frenchman knows that he is not a German, not an Englishman or a Spaniard, although he does not even think about the reasons for this difference. And every Ukrainian is sure that he neither Pole nor Tatar.
Before the Mongol invasion, all the Eastern Slavs were “friends” for each other, despite numerous princely feuds. All of them were ruled by the princes of the visiting Varangian dynasty of Rurikovich. All professed Orthodoxy with strong vestiges of paganism. Everyone sang the same epics from the Kyiv cycle about Ilya Muromets and Dobrynya Nikitich.
Listing the princes, the author of “The Tale of Igor’s Campaign” refers to Vsevolod the Great Nest of Suzdal, Vseslav of Polotsk, Glebovich of Ryazan, and Yaroslav Osmomysl of Galicia. He calls on all of them to stand up for the Russian land, by which he meant both the Kiev region and the distant Suzdal region with the barely emerging little Moscow.
And this was not just an ideological declaration! In 1223, the son of Vsevolod the Great Nest Yuri, to help the Chernigov, Kiev and Galician princes who went against the Mongols, sent a detachment led by his vassal - the Rostov prince, and the same Mstislav the Udaly, starting his career in distant northern Novgorod, calmly moved to reign in south - to Galich. And the local population did not at all consider him a “Muscovite.”
"Be that as it may, the founder of the first princely dynasty in Rus' was a Viking from the Skjeldung clan - Rurik, who laid down the traditions of domestic great power. His first capital was Ladoga. ... It is also known that in 873 he managed to get a district in Friesland and return "to the West. But even before that, he managed to give birth to a son, Igor, who inherited the newly acquired lands in Rus'. He, together with Oleg, will have to capture Kyiv, expanding his possessions to the Slavic south."
“The Novgorod Chronicle says: “And Igor grew up... And he had a governor named Oleg... And they began to fight - and they climbed the Dnieper River and the Smolensk city. And from there they went down the Dnieper... and saw Kiev and asked who was in reigns over him, and they told them: “Two brothers - Askold and Dir” (...) And Igor said to Askold: “You are not princes, and not of a princely family, but I am a prince and I should reign.” And they killed Askold and Dir."
“But if someone called the territories under their control Kievan Rus, they would be incredibly surprised - although less than at the sight of Grushevsky, who persistently called these Vikings with the title “ancient Ukrainian princes”, which he himself invented.
“Svyatoslav is the first of the Rurik dynasty that came to Kyiv who called himself not in the Varangian, but in the Slavic manner. Consequently, by the time of his birth the Vikings had already become well known on local soil. Overgrown with children, women and relatives.
But despite this, Svyatoslav himself did not have a drop of Slavic blood. His father was the Varangian king Ingvar, his mother was the Varangian Olga. Lev Deacon describes the prince’s bright northern appearance - blue eyes, blond hair, upturned nose. For southern Kyiv, such an anthropological type was then as rare as it is now. But according to culture, Svyatoslav was clearly “ours”. And he even wore his hair in the steppe manner - in the form of a hanging curl on his shaved skull.
This hairstyle greatly provoked the “harem-stuffed patriots.” Since there is an “Oseledets”, it means that there were Zaporozhye Cossacks already in the time of Svyatoslav! But Oseledets is not yet proof of the existence of Cossacks in Kievan Rus. In fact, this is an ancient nomadic hairstyle, found throughout the Great Steppe from Mongolia to Hungary. The Turks, by the way, would wear it in the same way in the 16th century, just like the Zaporozhye Cossacks. And on Svyatoslav’s head the “Oseledets” indicates, first of all, his connections with the steppe people. For a long time, the Kiev prince raged precisely in alliance with the Pechenegs - those who ultimately made a cup out of his head.”
In “Stories for School Age Children,” published in Lvov in 1934 and reprinted several times in Canada, there is a charming picture “Muscovites Ruin Kiev.” On it, bearded goblins in pointed helmets picturesquely cut, grab the patlas and rape the unfortunate Kievites. The heart bleeds.
But after reading the text under the picture, you begin to laugh sincerely - it turns out that they “ruined” in 1169, when no “Muscovites” yet existed in nature, and Moscow itself was barely registered on the pages of history. It was mentioned for the first time in the chronicles just twenty-two years earlier as a tiny town of the Suzdal prince Yuri Dolgoruky. In significance it was something like the current regional center. Therefore, writing that in 1169 “Muscovites were ruining Kiev” is the same as suggesting that a gang of pig thieves from Kobelyak poses a threat to the capital of present-day Ukraine.
But somehow it was forgotten that in fact it was the Galicians who destroyed Kievan Rus - those same famous Roman and Danilo Galitsky and several other colorful personalities who preceded them. “Although the Ukrainian state did not disappear through the devastation of Kiev,” writes the already mentioned “History for Children...” “It continued for two hundred years. Only a few of the cores slipped in on the way out.”
What blatant Bandera nonsense! It is clear that for no reason at all the state cores are not moving. They are driven by historical figures. And usually with separatist intentions. In the 12th century, Galich was precisely the core of local separatism.
Since we're talking about this, let's note that
“Galicians differed from real Russians in everything - psychology, anthropological type and, (most importantly!) non-Slavic origin.
Yes Yes! Precisely non-Slavic! Subconsciously, natives of Western Ukraine are still aware of this...
Anyone who has communicated with residents of the Lviv or Ivano-Frankivsk regions knows the local expression - “racial Galician.” “Yogo squad is a racial Galician!” - they will tell you with pride. Or: “Pan Zenik is a true racial Galician.” And they will point to the fidgety “kurdupel” (short-legged sub in our opinion) with ideological hysteria in his eyes...
The answer can be found in any monograph on Slavic ethnogenesis.
At the turn of the old and new eras, there were no Slavs in Galicia. It was inhabited by the carriers of the so-called “Carpathian mound culture” - the Dacian tribe of carps. The ancient Dacians are the ancestors of today's Romanians and Moldovans. In the 2nd century, under Emperor Trajan, they were conquered by the Romans, who founded the province of Dacia on the territory of present-day Romania.
But the conquerors did not reach the Carpathians and Upper Transnistria themselves. Poor local territories inhabited by backward savages simply did not interest the natives of Italy.
This continued until the era of the Great Migration, when the Slavs began to infiltrate here from Volyn. In the 5th–6th centuries, this part of the Dacians, having fallen under their rule, lost their language and switched to the Slavic dialect, naturally distorting it. From the Dacians who submitted to the Romans came the Romanians and Moldovans. And from those remnants who recognized the superiority of the Slavs are the current Galicians. Thus, it would not be an exaggeration to say that the Galicians are essentially Slavicized Moldovans."
“Looking at how the Hutsuls gallop around Vatra with their national tomahawks, I don’t doubt one iota the reasons for this “uniqueness.” The same Romanian-Moldovan (geto-Dacian!) melodies, the same hook-nosed non-Slavic faces, exactly the same embroidered with Carpathian Tsatskami Keptari with fur in. While they are silent, you can’t tell them apart from Moldovans!
The Carpathian lands came under the rule of Rus' late. At first, Kyiv competed for them with Poland. They competed with varying success, until at the end of the 10th century Vladimir the Holy selected them as part of the so-called “Cherven cities”. Hence another name for Galicia – Chervonnaya Rus. Its capital, by the way, was not Galich at first, but Przemysl.”
In general, while Galician nationalists are coming up with ideas about the fact that Russians are not Slavs, but either Mongol-Tatars or Finno-Ugric people, in reality we observe non-Slavic origins among the Galicians. The only thing that is true in their writings is that the Galicians are not Russians. But, as we see, they are not Ukrainians and not Slavs at all
We do not draw any chauvinistic conclusions from the non-Slavic origin of the Galicians, only a statement of fact. It’s just that the delusional nature of the ideological dogmas of Ukrainian, Galician, and nationalism becomes more obvious. By the way, if the Carpathian Gtsuls - Dacians-non-Slyans - are Ukrainians, then why shouldn’t the Ukrainian-Slavs be Russians?
As already said, “in the 12th century, Galich was the core of local separatism.”
But let’s omit the details of the history of Galician separatism - you can read about them in the book of Oles Buzina (1). The overall final picture is important:
“In essence, Rus' was simply an accumulation of demoralized people, which was divided by princes from the proliferating Rurik family. After all, all these Vladimirkas, Vsevolods, Ivan Berladniks are, although distant, relatives. All of them are descendants of Grand Duke Vladimir the Saint. But there is not enough land for them, since each leaves numerous heirs. The permanent civil war between the princes turns simply into a fact of everyday life - the same as rain, slush and death of livestock. The gentlemen are fighting - the men's forelocks are cracking.
But this murky chaos certainly does not fit into the “Ukrainians against Muscovites” scheme! It doesn’t fit in, if only because the best ally of the Galician Vladimir in the fight against Kyiv becomes the Suzdal Yuri Dolgoruky. Yes Yes! The same “founder of Moscow” thrice cursed by the authors of countless stories for children.
Their partnership is so strong that Yuri Dolgoruky even gives his daughter for his son Vladimir - Yaroslav Osmomysl. Two provincial princes are cementing a villainous alliance against Kyiv with family ties!”
And one more detail
Now, when we, Ukrainians, are being taken almost “from Adam”, when, following the “History of Ukraine of Rus'”, they are ready to write the history of “Ukraine of Sarmatia”, “Ukraine of Scythia” and, probably, “Ukraine of Vandalia”, they forget that on top of ancient Kiev, burned in 1240 by the Mongols of Batu, lies a thick layer of ash. “Most of the people of Russia,” writes Giovanni del Plano Carpini, who visited these places after the defeat, “were killed or taken captive.” There are almost no descendants of the Kievites of that time - until the middle of the 16th century there was a gaping abyss of political emptiness. No, Ukraine is not Rus'! It differs from it in the same way as France differs from Gaul, and modern Italy differs from the Roman Empire. Or like the Budennovsky stallion from the Don. Of course, a descendant in a direct line - but how much fresh blood has been infused..."
When did the name Ukraine appear and since when can we talk about Ukrainians as a special community?
“When Lithuania united with Poland, the most violent began to flee to the border of the Wild Steppe, where the Zaporozhye Sich arose. It was a real ferment. Hot heads from everywhere gathered here, even from the Crimean Khanate - the Kochubeis, known from Pushkin’s “Poltava,” for example. At the end of the 16th century, unable to accommodate and feed the new Cossack elite, gluttonous and insolent, Zaporozhye exploded in a series of uprisings that lasted a whole century and laid the foundation for a new state - Ukraine.
What is curious: even in the time of Bogdan Khmelnitsky, Ukraine was called a tiny strip of land on the border with the Wild Field - Zaporozhye, Kiev region, Cherkassy and Kaniv eldership. Lviv region, Podolia, even Volyn were not included in it. Talking about the reasons for the uprising of 1648, the author of the Cossack “Chronicle of the Self-Witness” writes in a language already slightly different from Old Russian, but not yet very similar to Ukrainian: “The Russian Vira had a great confabulation from the Uniates and priests, since there was no longer a unique union in Lytvia , in Volyn, Ala and Ukraine, a mountain of brothers began.” Therefore, Volyn for him is not Ukraine!
But gradually the name of the steppe strip spread all the way to the Carpathians, and the local population began to call themselves Ukrainians instead of Rusyns.
Finding themselves, thanks to Bogdan Khmelnitsky, as part of one state, Ukrainians and Russians, who were often called Muscovites, felt that they were damn similar, but, on the other hand, were subtly different in some way, and immediately gave each other the funny nicknames of crests and Katsaps. Some wore beards. Others are settlers. Some wore their shirts over their trousers. Others tucked it into trousers. Some are accustomed to bawling at parliaments when electing a hetman. Others unquestioningly carried out all the orders of the Tsar Father. 500 years have passed since the times of Kievan Rus - a huge period. In the south, the hot Polovtsian and phlegmatic Lithuanian were mixed with the blood of the ancient Russians. In the north, the population of Kievan Rus dissolved the Finnish tribes, which in the 12th century inhabited the territory of even present-day Moscow. But a common faith (Orthodoxy) and common enemies (Tatars, Turks and Poles) helped them get along under the scepter of the Romanovs and push the boundaries of the Slavic superpower all the way to the Danube and the Black Sea.”
So, now some differences have appeared in the Russian people. What is not surprising is that the people were settled over a large territory and separated by the borders of different states. The term “Ukraine” appeared.
"The geographical term 'Ukraine' is indeed quite ancient; it is found not only in the Ipatiev Chronicle, but also in many other chronicles. But one must understand that the medieval term 'kraina', like 'okolie', 'okolica', is exclusively geographical (not ethnic) term, and this term was applied not only to the territory of southern Rus'. There were many outskirts (Ukraines), and not only in Russian or Polish history. For example, in the medieval Roman Empire (Byzantium) there were the so-called Akrits - a subculture of peasants warriors who guarded the borders of the Roman Empire from the Arabs (as they then called Byzantium). If you translate the Greek word;;;;;;; (akritas) into Russian, you get 'Ukrainian' (resident of the outskirts - border guard). Moreover, these warriors - the Akrites, from an everyday and ethnocultural point of view, differed from the inhabitants of Constantinople no less than a Cossack with a forelock from a Muscovite in a uniform, but both of them called themselves Romans (Romans in Greek)" (3)
But even then (during the reunification of Ukraine with Russia), Oles Buzina admits that the similarities between the reunited parts of the people were “damn” obvious, and the differences were “elusive.”
In any case, as Oles Buzina writes, we managed to get along
Getting along is said too carefully.
Were there any problems with this?
Does this mean that Ukrainians dreamed of their own statehood and independence? Does this mean that Ukrainians in the Russian Empire were oppressed based on their nationality? In the USSR, Ukrainians Khrushchev and Chernenko headed the state. In Russian-language schools in Ukraine, the Ukrainian language was taught, and there were also schools with Ukrainian as the language of instruction. Ukrainian songs were heard in the media. “Kobzar” by Taras Shevchenko was published in Soviet Ukraine in a larger circulation than during all the years of Ukrainian independence. This can hardly be called national oppression. And in the Russian Empire?
“Ukrainians managed to play an outstanding role in the fate of the Russian Empire. Actually, the idea was invented by the Kiev monk Feofan Prokopovich, who unusually pleased Peter I with his wit and efficiency.
And then the “friendship of peoples” was cemented by Peter’s daughter Elizaveta and a simple Cossack from the Chernigov region Alexey Razumovsky, acting out a plot about a princess from a fairy tale right in bed. Razumovsky’s nickname – “night emperor” – speaks for itself. His brother Kirill, the president of the Russian Academy of Sciences, will be reported on duty by Lomonosov, in whose works a new strange word will appear for the first time - Ukrainians.”
Successes in St. Petersburg distracted us from the problems of local self-government for a long time. Field Marshal Paskevich, a Poltava resident, takes Warsaw at the head of the Russian army and becomes friends with Nicholas I. Gogol travels to Italy at the tsar’s expense, where he spends tens of thousands on pasta on a grand scale. Bezborodko, the Chancellor of the Empire, dying, bids farewell to the assembled public with a phrase, the level of which modern political thought has not yet reached: “I don’t know how it will be with you, young people, but with us not a single cannon in Europe can be fired without our permission.” dare!”
Yes, is it even close to Ukraine when you have an entire empire in your hands! Even Pushkin, annoyed by the successes of the descendants of the Cossacks in “northern Palmyra,” will angrily remark that his ancestor “did not jump to princes from crests,” forgetting that he jumped into the Russian nobility straight from an African palm tree.
When the empire was not enough for all Ukrainians, the idea of independence was born. Although, I’m sure, in fact, we are very much not against the new version of Kievan Rus. All the way to Vladivostok. With us at the helm. With the free transfer of Siberian oil to the joint-stock company of Mirgorod pensioners. And with Zhirinovsky, marching to the Indian Ocean with the rank of corporal in the Ukrainian army. Well, at most, a junior sergeant. For we are unusually generous in spirit. We don't feel sorry for anything. For myself".
That is, in the Russian Empire, the elite consisted of Ukrainians along with Russians.
Because no one divided anyone based on nationality into Ukrainians and Russians, no one oppressed anyone based on nationality.
And the idea of separatism and independence arose among those representatives of the elite who did not get warm places at the feeding trough... But there have always been such dodgers, in any nation. There was never any talk about the fact that the people cherished their values and hoped to escape from the clutches of national oppression, from alien values.
Ukrainians were never oppressed by the Russians, these are not different cultures, there are more commonalities than differences, they are a single people, different parts of which acquired some local characteristics due to the fact that the people were settled over a large territory and divided by state borders (Russia, Austria- Hungary, Poland, Czech Republic)
So what about the jealousy of the Ukrainian nation? Oh, yes: “Tripillian culture”. A few words about this myth. It is curious that now Russophobes are running around with this argument, proving the antiquity of the “Ukrainian nation” in comparison with the Muscovites. But for the first time this argument was put forward by a Czech Russophile to prove the antiquity of the Russian people, which includes Ukrainians. But it's not that. And the fact is that
“... the origins of the Trypillian culture were discovered... on the territory of Romania. Moreover: in Transylvania - the homeland of the infamous Prince Dracula! From here it spread out in concentric circles, first crossing the Danube, then the Dniester and finally approaching the Dnieper.
Actually, the settlement excavated ... near Tripoli is just its easternmost outpost. ...
Trypillian culture died out in the 3rd millennium BC. e. The first historical evidence about the Slavs dates back only to the beginning of the 1st millennium AD. e. The historical gap between them is twenty centuries! In addition, the ancestral home of the Slavs... is located on the territory of Polesie. Byzantine historians describe them as typical forest dwellers. But the Trypillians never settled in the forest zone at all. Their culture fits completely into the forest-steppe zone, which Ukrainians began to develop only in the 17th century AD. e., and will be fully populated only under Catherine II. What kind of identity between Ukrainians and Trypillians can we talk about after this?”
What about the great ancient Ukrainians? Have they never existed?
I hasten to reassure the patriots: they were!
There was an older tribe than the Russians, the Ukrov, who lived near the Ucker River in Germany (2), from which they got their name (3). They had nothing to do with Ukraine and Ukrainians, they did not found Rome, they did not build Egyptian pyramids.
But to deduce from the mere similarity of names “the antiquity of the Ukrainian nation”... Why such insanity?.. Or... there is no smoke without fire? But our nationalists are not original even here
“Emerging on the political arena, ... [any state] certainly invents a brilliant pedigree for itself. Nobody cares about its authenticity. The main thing is crackling, fireworks, and excitement.
The ancient Swedes traced themselves directly to the god Odin. The Poles of the 13th century, when only the lazy did not beat them, credited their ancestors with the victory over Alexander the Great. The Jews came up with a fairy tale about their being chosen by God. As for the Ukrainians, they, according to the majority of our historians, have always existed. This theory is called “autochthonous” - translated from the obscure ancient Greek “autochthon” - “self-generated”, “indigenous”. That is, according to the logic of her followers, a certain Pithecanthropus, hatching from a monkey in Africa, came to the banks of the Dnieper, and then slowly degenerated into a Ukrainian, from whom Russians, Belarusians and other peoples, including the Indians, descended. ...
It seems to me that with such a theory you can do nothing at all: the talented ancestor Pithecanthropus has already done everything for you. And you lie on the sofa, spit on the floor and watch with contempt as someone on TV receives the Nobel Prize...”
“I’m wondering: do modern Mongols, sitting in yurts in the middle of the bare steppe, also say, “We are ancient, we had Genghis Khan and we conquered half the world?” Or are they still not as stupid as the Svidomites and Zmagars?
It doesn’t matter who was once there! The Greeks were also an ancient and powerful civilization, and today they are one of the poorest countries in the EU, with huge debts, a rapidly falling GDP and under the external control of Berlin and Brussels.
On the other hand, on the site of modern New York four hundred years ago there was a virgin forest, and today the USA is the world hegemon (admittedly, rapidly moving towards retirement, but still).
Who did antiquity and old achievements ever help? If today you are poor and powerless lackeys and schmucks under external control, then absolutely no one cares. In this case, the presence of glorious ancestors only emphasizes your modern insignificance" (4)
In general, the patriots of Ukraine still cannot find a more worthy occupation than measuring lengths. But even if measuring the length of body parts is stupid (despite the fact that it is, after all, your body, and besides, this parameter, they say, can be influenced consciously; another question is why), then measuring the length of a historical pedigree is absolute stupidity. Because no matter what heroic our ancestors did, your merit in this is absolutely zero. And for everything that happens to you now, you are primarily responsible.
Is it because the patriots of Ukraine are trying to be proud of their mythical antiquity because they understand: in real life, in themselves, in their actions, in their results, they have absolutely nothing to be proud of?
Sources (default – 1)
1) Oles Buzina. The secret history of Ukraine-Rus
2) https://uk.wikipedia.org/wiki/
Or in English: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uecker
3) https://www.elpiadis.com/russia
4) Alexander Rogers: The pride of limitrophes and the horror of reality
