Who is the most important historical figure in Ukrainian history?

[Zbyszek]

Originally Posted by Max_the_Highlander

Here we don't use it and don't want to. There is only state which existed in that time and other names are not proper - but how could lame amateurs know that, really?

I read many books of scientists about Kyivan Rus and I'm often guest in Kyiv but no one uses this term either in solid works or modern life.

It's something external and not natural for Kyivan consciousness so let's throw to the trash can.

I am sure ANY serious researcher trying to describe History of Ukraine MUST be able to read Ukrainian, Polish and Russian source material. It is not a matter of like it or not. It is just indispensible.
Kyivan Rus was a noble state but it was not the only Rus through centuries.
I generally regard Wikipedia as a reliable and good source of information for average readers and I do respect the authors' effort.

Good, interesting historians dealing with East Europe history research in my opinion are:

Ukrainian: Subtelny, Khrushevski
Russian-Ukrainian: Kostomarov
Russian: Mikhail Heller, Syergy Solovyov
Polish: Pawel Jasienica, Michal Bobrzynski, Wladyslaw Konopczynski
English: Norman Davies

[Max_the_Highlander]

I don't understand what are you talking about. I never heard about Kyivan Rus and any "Ruthenia" together in historic context... now that sounds really odd.

Political center of Slav life was for a period in Halych, later it came to North, to Vladimir, later to Moskow... but that was many centuries after the "Age of great Kyivan Princes".

In period of Volodymyr and Yaroslaw there was not any "Ruthenia"... and later too, actually.

As about Wikies of all kinds (Wiki is technology, it's not particular site) so they are entertainment source as maximum because no one attests them and writers are hidden under alises so you even don't know who wrote that rot.

I prefer to read books of real scientists, former and modern, if I need to get clues.

[bm-21Lemko]

since Yaroslav is in my ancestry tree. It doesn't say what state, just the leader of Kyiv.

His name is not written like this in my tree, Ярослав instead its in old Norse like this Jarisleif.

He most doubtedly was of leader of the Kyivan Rus state.

In the late 1700s the term Ruthenia was used as modern day Ukraine.

that term changed in the 1840s from Little Rus to Ukraine. But the term was still used in the Austro-hungarian empire until it colapsed.

Regional Ukrainians still used the term ruthenian in parts of the old Austro-hungarian empire. Now mostly Carpatho-rusyns use it. Lemkos, Hutsuls, Boikos. They are Ukrainian as we stem from one of the seven Ukrainian tribe.

[Zbyszek]

My mistake - sorry

[Zbyszek]

Originally Posted by bm-21Lemko

...In the late 1700s the term Ruthenia was used as modern day Ukraine.

that term changed in the 1840s from Little Rus to Ukraine. But the term was still used in the Austro-hungarian empire until it colapsed.

Regional Ukrainians still used the term ruthenian in parts of the old Austro-hungarian empire. Now mostly Carpatho-rusyns use it. Lemkos, Hutsuls, Boikos. They are Ukrainian as we stem from one of the seven Ukrainian tribe...

Dear Lemko, my general remark is as follows: we have discussed similar things many times before and sometimes discussion was at high level, including Russians (The Last Word, Zhuk, Petro Moskal), Ukrainians (Kathy, Mazepa, Jarema, Kazhan, Big Daddy, StasUA, V-G, Johnstruthers), Poles (Halina, me, Michael). We have written plenty of nice articles worth reading. You can find them in History forum list - dig in please, help yourself. Kathy, Zhuk and The Last Word were particularly competent, apart from the fact that The Last Word had anti-Ukrainian bias. I really appreciated The Last Word's contributions realizing perfectly that they were consciously Russo-centric.
Realize please that Kievan Rus was a federalistic state and attraction to Kiev was sometimes not much more than symbolic because it was technically too difficult to implement given vast areas. Bitter inter-provincial quarrels undermined stability of this state and fastened its decline. Therefore, it was much different from centrally-governed Muscovy state constructed having terrible experience of the Mongole invasion in mind.



Lemko, I do think you should realize that because of scarcity of accessible source material concering Middle Ages we have to be careful when categorizing things. It applies for instance to the Viking roots of Kievan princes - it is not a hard fact but rather something probable and yet not sure. Contrary to Max, I see that entries in the Wikipedia were carefully prepared and there are references given below for more inquiring readers. Do not you think that Max's vague mention of 'scientists' meaning UKRAINIAN scientists exclusively is out of balance?

Citation from Wikipedia:--------
By the 14th century, the state of Rus had disintegrated into loosely united principalities. Vladimir-Suzdal and the Novgorod Republic in the north were kept from mongol domination. Later, one of the daughter-principalities of Vladimir-Suzdal, the Moscow principality (or Muscovy) took control of most of the northern principalities of Rus, and started to use the word, "Rus'," to cover the expanded state. Natives used other forms of the name Rus for their country, and some of these forms also passed into Latin and English.

The territories of Halych-Volynia , Kiev and other in the south were occupied by the mongols and were freed just in the XV century, and united with Catholic Lithuania and Poland, and therefore were usually denoted by the Latin Ruthenia. However, other spellings were used in Latin, English and other languages during this period as well.

These southern territories have corresponding names in Polish:

Ruś Halicko-Wołyńska — Halych-Volynia
Ruś Halicka — Halych
Ruś Biała — White Ruthenia, White Russia or Belarus
Ruś Czarna — Black Ruthenia, part of modern Belarus
Ruś Czerwona — Red Ruthenia, small strip in Poland (Przemysl), and the West part of Ukraine (Galicia). Poland called the area the Ruthenian Voivodeship.
Ruś Podkarpacka — Carpathian Ruthenia
----------------------------------------- end of citation.

So you see that the term RUTHENIA varied across centuries and countries. I'd recommend you to read Orest Subtelny rather that modern domestic Ukrainian scientists who look like politically sponsored and motivated. And beware of official government stamped history versions even if professors put their sign under. Kostomarov is also worth recommending. His views look like deprived of nationalism.

[Max_the_Highlander]

Originally Posted by Zbyszek

It applies for instance to the Viking roots of Kievan princes - it is not a hard fact but rather something probable and yet not sure.

Oh what a big Wiki scientist and what a poor mistake! I guess that shows the truth beyond the flow of empty words.

Rurick, Dir, Askold, Oleg and Igor were pure ethnic NORTHMEN.

I guess you don't know that because your intellectual horizons are restricted by Wikipedia.

What for to stress the air by names? Can't get the whole thing?

"Ruthenia" is Latin term reffered to lands of Kyivan Rus, later to Western Ukrainian lands as Halych or Transcarpathia.

But the real state never was named so and succesing states also held other names.

Can't you realise Slavs never named own states and lands by LATIN labels?

[Zbyszek]

Rurik - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia