Comments on: Polish, Russian, Lithuanian? Or maybe White Ruthenian?

By: michael proch

michael proch — Fri, 02 Jul 2010 03:36:34 +0000

0one must remember that kievan rus and novgorod rus were the same places. later when one of the princes rebelled he sacked kiev and made vladimir in suzdal (n.e.) the new capital of all rus. each region was ruled by a family member but owned alligiance to the head of the family, the grand prince. there was no king, no emperor or czar at that time. each province developed its own subculture and customs. when the mongols invaded they broke the power of the state of rus (not ruthenia) it disintegrated into smaller states. some accepted mongol overlordship such as moscow, otherwise, they would be destroyed. the southern and western provinces joined as the state of “great litva” which was belarussian in character with modern lithuanians. the remained orthodox until the union of lublin and poland took the provinces from lithuania and started to force the people to go under the pope, hence greek catholic, or they were persecuted by the roman catholic church. many priests accepted and were allowed to keep the same services and customs. the polish replaced rus nobles with polish , sometimes through marriage and the rus people were made peasants. the term russian is nowadays associated with moscow but the rus were all the peoples . think of italy, each region has differant customs and even dialects but all are italian. even sicily which some believe is not. hence all the slavic peoples living in the region of kievan rus 1090 a.d. should be considered russian not ukranian or ruthenian. these are later terms given by the west (catholic) to divide the people. the problem was that the moscow state became autocratic and the czar was all powerfulf which was a concept foreign to the rus. their way was sharing and more democratic but aside from turks, tatars and hungarians in these regions thay all all a form of rus.

By: michael proch

michael proch — Sun, 27 Jun 2010 01:34:59 +0000

my great grandfather was a well known carpenter in belarus and owned 100 acre farm till the soviets siezed half the land, they spoke russian, i never knew otherwise but noe of the granchildren could speak or understand.

By: michael proch

michael proch — Sun, 27 Jun 2010 01:31:17 +0000

my grandparents were from white russia. they always considered themselves a form of russian, never polish or lithuanian. they came from a village n.e. of lida call dukadovo which i believe today is dakudava. he was a carpenter and worked for the orthodox church there till it burned down ; then he came to america for work. he had several sisters all with russian names ( belorussian i guess) who satyed there. in america they lived in jersey city where downtown were polish , russian ,& ruthenian. they belonged to the russian orthodox church, he was a member of the council. they were always russian americans, then asked what kind ,white russian. we always knew polish people were different from us, we were russian american. my fathers people came from a town which is in poland today, ksiezpol. they considered themselves russian also but on some of their papers it said ruthenian. they s[oke a dialect close to ukranian but would say we are not ukranian, we are russian. they had belonged to the russian greek catholic church but when the congregation split they went to the russian orthodox, both sides considered themselves of russian descent , not polish, not ukranian or lithuanian?

By: Islander

Islander — Thu, 16 Jul 2009 14:08:39 +0000

I personally totally agree with you. However, one should bear in mind that while you might see the difference between White Ruthenians and Russians, some might argue otherwise. I have heard theories, coming primarily from Russian historians, that “White Ruthenians” is an imaginary concept originated by nationalist movements to gain political leverage. Now, do I agree with it? Not at all, but the “Russian” stigma will be there for a very long time, if not forever.

By: Slavko

Slavko — Wed, 15 Jul 2009 19:59:13 +0000

Please do not mix Russia and Rus, Russians and Rusyns(Ruthenians) ! If you do it shows only your ignorance! Lithuanians, Poles and Rusyns were once constitutive nations of Polish – Lithuanian Duchiny. Russians were not.

By: Islander

Islander — Fri, 14 Apr 2006 15:52:32 +0000

Way to go Skorik!!! Long time no see, where have you been?

By: Scorik

Scorik — Fri, 14 Apr 2006 13:19:09 +0000

Islander, I have another book for you, by a Russian author. It mostly concentrated on the orthodox religion and Russians, but it’s still a good read since it shows how different nationalities were created, moved, and died in that region.
For example, I never knew that Russians actually don’t exist anymore, at least according to this book. Slavs who lived in that region inherited the name from the dying nationality.

By: xela

xela — Thu, 13 Apr 2006 13:25:27 +0000

well, you don’t have to leave Europe to be citizen of the world…I guess it’s more like state of mind… anyway, I guess you’re right

By: anuszka

anuszka — Thu, 13 Apr 2006 10:46:53 +0000

> Mickiewicz was a kind of ‘citizen of the Europe’
> (if not world)

AFAIK, Mickiewicz never left Europe.

By: xela

xela — Wed, 12 Apr 2006 22:23:32 +0000

interesting input, Anuszka, indeed this whole story about who is who is a bit confusing.
Yet I, personally, believe Mickiewicz was a kind of ‘citizen of the Europe’(if not world)