If you use the old name for Pskov (Pleskov), then the old name of Vladimir is Volodimir (or sometimes Volodimer). This is the same name as Volodymyr (to distinguish them Volodimir in Volyn' was called Volodimer-Volynsky, and Volodimir in modern Russia was sometimes called Volodimer-Zalessky or named Volodimer-on-Klyazma after the river). Volodymyr is his modern name in Ukrainian. And Vladimir is the Church Slavonic name that became official in modern Russian, when the original Russian form for the name of the city and the male name is Volodimir (the colloquial form of the male name is still Volodia).
Modern name of Volodimir in Ukraine is Volodymyr-Volhynskyi. Unfortunately Volhynia (as Rus land and modern Ukraine land) lost a lot of its historical towns which nowadays are in other states (for example, Kholm and Bila (modern Chelm and Biala-Podlaska in Poland), Berestia and Pynsk (modern Brest and Pinsk in Belarus). Volhynian territory was from modern Hajnowka in Poland in the north to Starokostiantyniv in the south, and from Zviagel (modern Novograd-Volhynskyi) in the east to Chelm and Krasnystav in Poland. Ancient capital of Volhynia - Volhyn town - was on the right bank of West Bug near modern Hrubieszow in Poland.
The name origin of "Rus" has many debates. One possibility is that the Swedes/Vikings were called "Rus" because they were boat rowers on the rivers into the lands. The Finnish language today still calls Sweden "Ruotsi".
I don't think so. North Germanic tribes haven't invaded anything yet in that period of time when this state appears. It's name probably based on Slavic root. Meaning red or blonde. For example in modern Ukrainian: rud(-yj) "red" and rus(-yj) "blonde".
@@galiapetrova45 I know that but this is debate about Normandic theory that has nothing to do with Goths. Actually Goths had couple of countries inside Ukraine but mostly West and South. Rus is term found by Antes who were ancestors of Slavs and neighbor of mentioned before East Germanic tribe.
These must be always looked at from every angle, for example when the state of Novgorod was founded, Carelians, Estonians, Ruotsit (Swedes), Finns, Ingrian were already involved. It was not nothing surprisingly new. At some point, carelians had a leading role in Novgorod. :)
There was not a "Rus kaganate",there were tribal union "Slavia" in north and "Kieavia" in south. But er cant know 100% were there some goverment before Rurik or not,but there was no kaganate,thats 100%.
@@dowmont6209 the "rus" khaganate was just a tribe in the south of Rus' who became free from khazar tribute and became conquering the neghboring tribes and force them to pay tributes and that tribe borrowed the title of khagan from khazars and the funniest thing that the "khaganate" was located in the Kiev area while ukrainians trying to call russians anyone else but not slavs XDD
Не было никакой "Киевской" Руси, была просто Русь. И её преемниками являются 🇧🇾🇷🇺 🇺🇦 - преемник Хазарии, печенегов и половцев. К Руси никакого отношения не имеет.
@@OrkosUA It was made by one Moskovian brilliant scientist and hypocrite. Who used it to create myth about Moskovian, Novgorodian, Suzdalia and whatever kind of Rus to steal this term.
@@нагибаторпросто You would break your mind if you continue. But sure in a sence that this lands were time to time exploit by Rus they indeed were part of the Empire. More specifically those lands were in the area of dependence. And not they were not called Rus. They have their own names but still you have your point.
@@rosintruder6867 1453 not 1543. At least not in this timeline, perhaps if the Fourth Crusade never happened but the Angeli Dynasty's rampant corruption eventually lead to the dissolving of the Roman Empire that had already began before 1204 (eg Empire of Trebizond)
The "rus" khaganate was just a tribe in the south of Rus' which became free from khazar tribute and became conquering the neghboring tribes and force them to pay tributes and that tribe borrowed the title of khagan from khazars, it's wrong that it's located in Novgorod in the video. The funniest thing that the "khaganate" was located in the Kiev area while ukrainians trying to call russians anyone else but not slavs XDD
...except Ukrainians didn't exist as a distinct nation back then, even Ukraine originally meant Borderland 😛 ... no nation willingly names itself like that...
I have never heared that Rus' Khaganat ever controlled territories in Ukraine (before capturing of Kyiv by Oleg). Do you have any real proof? Rus' Khaganat was a hypothetic Varangian state in northern Russia that most possibly controlled the Volga trade rout. It definitely never ever controlled Western Ukraine.
There is no consensus about this between historians. Though I pretty much agree with you about Rus' Khaganate never controlling territories of modern-day Ukraine, there are still theories about that. We may never know for sure
It is a hypothetical state, but the Byzantine sources of the 9th century show a large state controlling most of the rivers, in an area called Scythia by the Greeks. It was definitely a big state coming to the Black Sea, where there were a lot of raids and that's why it sparked interest in the first mission during the years of Photios the Great
Даже если верить переписанной московитами истории " Воскресенским" летописям , Новгородские земли не были Русью до14 века. На Новгородские земли ,а позже и на Московские ( когда московиты уничтожили Новгород) термин "Русь" применялась в крнфессиональном смысле.
I have never heard about Rus Khaganat. I think it is rather a fantasy. If to guess it ever existed we should know at least one name of it's Khagan. But sush is unknown. With same possibility we can ask whether existed Rus Sultanate or Rus Emirate.
@@fidel1803 if you haven't heard about something, it doesn't mean it didn't exists. It just means you are ignorant. Slavs ruled by Rus under the term "Khagan" was mentioned in the Arabic and Byzantium texts of the 7 century. Given Khazar Khaganate was a big deal back then yet, and capturing Slavic settlements (the Library of Congress in Washington has Khazar legal documents discovered in Kiev, for example), it's most likely the Varangyan and Slavic tribes would adopt the title used by their more powerful and developed neighbor. They've got the "Tsar" (Ceasar) from Byzantium eventually, there's absolutely no reasons why they wouldn't do it with "Khagan" earlier. Though, we wouldn't know for sure as the writing evidence is scarce, and most was destroyed during following Mongol invasion and Christianization, where the Church was destroying every Pagan artifacts.
There has never been a state with the self-name "Kievan Rus", the state was simply called "Rus". Kievskaya-this is just one of the stages of its existence, when the capital was Kiev. There are also other stages: Novgorod Rus, Vladimir Rus, Suzdal Rus, Moscow Rus, these are just different capitals of the same state. The author, be careful with such errors. No "Kiev" or "Russian Khaganate", this is nonsense from the author... The history of Russia as a single state ended in the middle of the 12th century, why the author went to the 13th is not clear, because after the invasion of the Mongol-Tatars, many principalities did not go away and continued to exist, in general, nonsense and only...
It was an intervention of the Poles in favor of Sviatopolk during the succession crisis of Kievan Rus. Soon after, Yaroslav prevailed and took over the whole area of Kievan Rus
@@CostasMelas Yes however, after establishing Sviatopolk Polish forces annexed area of Red Cities /Red Castles which were reconquered by Rus in 1031. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cherven_Cities
This is an intriguing but largely unknown period in Eastern Europe. I would be fascinated to know what the people considered themselves in this relatively vast land at the time, from north to south.
@@CostasMelas Oh no. I understand your point but these situation are quite different. We do know historical self-name of this state. They called it Rusish land. And even if we did want to create convention term it should refer to some known facts about it. But creator of term Kyivan Rus by creating it did only produce an idea about existing of specific kind of Rus. And so on about more kind of it. When in reality there were only one Rus. Term Kyivan Rus have no reason to exist besides being used in propaganda. This is the problem with it.
Costas Melas Hi. I guess I have some. I suggest you should add description for some important things in overall subject. Here it definitely would be name. "Term Kyivan Rus is an artificial creation invanted in XIX century. Original name was (in translation) Rusish land." And you still be able to use viral name in title just mention it in disclaimer. Add description of source material as well. For this work it would be Normanist theory. Write it in box or such. I guess things like this would definitely improve level of accuracy of you content.
Они комментарии под любым видео про Русь превращают в мycopку. Нормальные люди в комментах обсужают викингов, завоевания Святослава, но эти зомби спамят про финоугров, про московитов, про переписанную историю. По-моему, уже даже иностранцы, которые слабо шарят в истории Руси, понимают, что подобные выпyки это псевдоистория и ресентимент
@@niki6969. where did the slavs originated. Some say slavs originated in Ukraine and slavs entered Kiev in 5th century. And if you can. Can you please whole history of Russia and the russians. Sorry for my bad English
Do you really think that this empire that continues through North Asia and most of East Europe possible can be someone else besides all those who live in specific part of it? Nope.
@@paulmayson3129 1. most of the territories and cities of Rus' were on the territory of modern Russia 2. in Russian, the word "rasiyskiy" denotes belonging to the modern Russian state, but the word that denotes Russian culture, Russian language and Russian nationality sounds "ruskiy" 3. the history of Rus usually begins with Novgorod, Novgorod is in modern Russia 4.Rus is the state of the Eastern slavs, now the most eastern slavs in Russia (115 million out of 190) 5. the phrase "kievan rus" was invented in the 19th century, the inhabitants of Rus called it simply "rus" in Russia and Belarus also call it simply "rus" but the Ukrainians imposed "kievan rus" on you, now many Ukrainian nationalists call this state "Rus-Ukraine" you, too, will soon call so Rus'?😂😂😂😂
@@sarakin.al.joroasia hey you don't clever, eh?) Maybe they be Scandinavian people, but Rus are separate tribe. Rus are not svei(ancestors of modern swedes) tribe
@@vladimirthegreen6097 I write "related" not "origin", and I say eastern Vikings Varyagis, that mean broader name for more tribes not only Sweds, I know that Rus' are separate tribes and every dynasty of Kievan Rus' are from one of separate Rus' tribes.
@@sarakin.al.joroasia Oh no my friend. You are mistaken. First of all Varangians and Vikings are separated terms. Varangians are not ethic name by rather craft. Specifically warrior with a weapon. There were a lot of them. But the tribe that you were talking about are Rugi or Ruyans who were Slavic. Their name are definitely related to the name of the Kyivan state but only as cognates. Because it existed in the Dnieper region before Rugi did come. Probably there were several branches of the same Slavic tribe or maybe they both share same origin of the name.
History of Rus had a continuation in form of Kingdom of Galicia-Volynia which official name was Kingdom of Rus after Danylo of Galicia got crowned by Pope.
@@TheBobVova yeah, but it remained as part of Poland under the name "Województwo Ruskie" up until its annexation by Austria in 1772, when they decide to revive Galicia-Volynia's name (probably due to Hungarian crown's short rule over this land centuries ago).
Yes, you r absolutely right But As I know One Scandinavian chronicle said about Russian Khaganate in 843. Why? Maybe because of Tatar influence in that region (coz "state" of Khasars was so powerful in 9th century)
You left out the Principality of Jersika from Eastern Latvia (Latgale). And numerous other smaller Latvian principalities established / converted by the Kievan Rus. (Mainly Polotsk)
Rus' or Ruriks are Swedish Varyagi Vikings, eastern nordic tribe, but after the fall of Constantinopole and 1453. and liberation from the Mongols they became Slavs and build new Russian slavic nation.
Рюрик был знатным викингом, которого пригласили быть князем славяне в Новгороде. Славяне и скандинавы имели тесные экономические связи из-за торгового маршрута через восточную европу от Балтийского моря до Греции.
Askold and Dir not rulers. Askold and Dir just soldiers of Rurik. When Oleg come from Novgorod to Kiev he said "You are NOT Prince" and killed them both, as punishment for their lies.
@@tendum9139 The first Prince of Rus and founder of dynasty was Rurik. The second Prince of Rus was Oleg. The third Prince of Rus was the son of Rurik Igor.
@@Stalker-no8ch Read the history. Nestor the Chronicler writes that the first tribe who adopted the name Rus were Polians. Askold and Dir ruled in the center city (Kyiv) of Polians, so Askold and Dir were the rulers of Kyivan Rus. Every history book will tell you that Askold and Dir were the Princes of Kyivan Rus.
@adam messina If we ignore that fact that this video's statement of place where Rus appeared is incorrect. Then answer would be none. There lived mostly Uralic people and just a little bit Baltic as well. But If you asking me about real history. Then we need to change our point to lands of Northeast Slavic tribe called Eastern Polans. More specifically to Kyiv. Answer is North Slavic people.
@@Oleksij_Shelest As far as I know, the most northern Slavic tribes were Novgorodians/Pskovians and Rostovites/Vladimirites/Muscovites. Eastern Polans belonged to southern tribe of Rus.
@@ultraphitaro4834 I was talking about Muscovia because it is what he meant. Before Swedes in Muscovy and Novgorodian State were only Uralic people. But in a Centern Ukraine where Rus actually located situation is opposite. There were no Scandinavians. That state was founded by Slavs.
@@galiapetrova45 No they are not. You can say that Slavic languages was just an dialect of Baltic language at the start but not vise versa. Baltic languages are very authentic. Lithuania is just basically the oldest living Indo-European language that still been using for this days. A lot of modern Northern part of Central and East Europe are basically covered in Baltic hydronyms. So no. Balts are Balts.
horror how the history of Rus has been raped here. The so-called Rus kaganate was located in the Middle Dnieper region, that is, in the north of Ukraine, the capital of which, Kiev, is the source and only capital of Rus. There are many testimonies about the Rus as Slavs. Novgorod, which is shown in the video, was presumably founded in 859, and in the video it already exists at the beginning of the 9th century. Yes, and in the well-known historical document The Tale of Bygone Years of Nestor the Chronicler mentioned the existence of Rus until 862 (the Calling of the Varangians in Novgorod) and it was located in Kiev, because in the Eastern part of the European Plain as such cities, except for Kiev, did not exist until the end of the 9th century. Rus originated from Kiev, not from Novgorod
Khaganate was ruled under varangians, how they could arrive in dniper region without using north transition routes? Also in 7-9 centuries Volga-baltic trade dominated under dnieper-baltic, cause is khazars khaganate
@@Stalker-no8ch Rus could not have happened in 862 from Novgorod, because in 862 there was no one in Novgorod, its foundation falls on the middle of the 10th century
Такого история еще незнала, государственность пришла из севера, -малозаселенного региона в земли где в ту пору уже бьІли крупньІе города и поселения, перед составлением картьІ автору следовало хоть внимательно почитать "повесть временньІх лет" Русь бьІла известна еще до Рюрика и Олега!
Russians claim that inheritor of Kyivan Rus was their "Grand Duchy of Moscow" and not ukrainian "Kingdom of Galicia-Volhynia". The fact is that Kievan Rus stopped its existence in 1240. But the Duchy of Moscow appeared only in 1277. And it was founded by the Golden Horde Khan Mengu-Timur in 1277. So no. Russia not inherited Kievan Rus. They have more common with Golden Horde history, just look at their state emblem, for example, - eagle with two heads. The same emblem had Golden Horde, and Russia inherited it from them. Also interesting fact that the Kyiv is much older city than the Moscow. It was founded in 482. Moscow in 1147.
Wrong. Russian double-headed eagle comes from the Byzantines who used it to assert hegemony all over the East and the West. Look also at the Serbian, Albanian, and Montenegrin state flags, even Greek Orthodox Church retains flags with the same symbol, all of them inherited the symbol from the same source...
@@LiveYourLifeWithJoy Russia (Moscovia) had nothing to do with Novgorod before the Battle of Shelon (1471). After that Russia occupied Novgorod and made genocide. en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Shelon
@@ivangolovach6203 Русская история начинается не с Москвы, хазарская ты маня) Она начинается в Ладоге в 862 году. "Киевская Русь" - термин, придуманный русскими историками в 19 веке, само государство так не называлось. Династия Рюриковичей дольше всего правила именно на наших землях и именно на наши земли переехал митрополит Киевский в 1299 году. Наша история тянется непрерывно от 862 года по нынешнее время, не прерываясь. Ваша же история начинается в 1917) Это именно РУССКАЯ история и вы, хазары, никакого отношения к Руси не имеете. И какой флаг? У Руси флага не было. А имя как раз сохранили именно РУССКИЕ и БЕЛОРУСЫ. Разве есть что-то общее между названием РУСЬ и названием ОКРАИНА? Мм? Я что-то не вижу. Россия - название Руси на греческом и латыни. Белоруссия/Беларусь - Белая Русь. Ваше хазарское окраинбабве к Руси каким боком?
@@niki6969. Русь это старое название Украины) украинская история начинается ещё в 482 году, условно когда был основан К на по легенде полянским князем Кием) а Русь это старое название Украины) Ладога это шведская фактория. Новогород согласно российской же археологии основан не позднее середины 10 века) и с самого начала был колонией Киева) Русь пошла от Киева и изначально название Русь имеет сарматские корни) ну к угрофиннам московии точно не относится) Кстати, украинцы это в прошлом русины, а понятие русины с раннего средневековья обозначается как сын Руси) есть термин Русь в узком или этническом смысле) это условная метрополия от которое зависили остальные княжества по типу Суздали, Новогорода, Смоленска, Полоцка) Русские появились при Сталине в 1930-х, до этого были выдуманные в 18 веке великороссы, а до того и вовсе без самоназвания) в Европе вас знали как московитов) белорусы это походное название литвинов проживающих в местности именуемой Белой Русью в товремя когда Русь (страна в среднем Поднепровье) имела огромное культурное влияние на земли бывшего полоцкого княжества и на Литву) но преемником Руси Беларусь это не делает) московитская история начинается в 1263 году когда многольским данном был дарован сыну Александра карателя Невского ярлык на княжение в Москве, отсюда и начинается ваша история) Культурно и политически Русь как таковою унаследовала Галичина которую все в Европе знали как Русь, и на территории которой было Руськое королевство) вообщем, поця, ты знатно просралась)
This is a theory. Several times in ancient documents, the ruler of the country is called Kagan. Which led to this thought. But this is strange. The country was Northern and lived like all northerners, there simply could not be this.
@@selimsahkulu78 Under the influence - maybe. But again, doubtful. Since these titles began to appear after the destruction of the Khazars. And under them, they had an impact only on the very South of the country. Plus this title is equal to emperors in its essence. And in Russia there were princes (which was then the tax of the Scandinavian kings). Maybe it was related to the vassals. But not Russia. And various nomads, there were a lot of them before the Mongol invasion. P.S. a Lot of things are not translated as they are called (titles and countries, I don't know why)
@@dariomoreno9267 Glory to the heroes (Glory to the Heroes) You would use at least a translator, there is no such word for Heroes glory in either English or Ukrainian. You wrote in Russian, but not knowing English, you threw it into Latin, bravo, maestro. > "Hero" Bandera, who burned the Ukrainian villages, killed at least 200 thousand people during the Second world war. Movie "Come and see" to help.
Wrong start. You have written Kievan Rus', the history of Kievan Rus', did you look on the map where Kiev is located?)) Then why do you paint on the map the Novgorod principality, which was under Batu Khan in 1240? Kiev has always been the capital of Kievan Rus', because Kievan Rus' is written in your name? There was no Novgorod, not Moscow Rus', Kiev was the capital of the Slavs since the time of the Roman Empire and was called Archeimar, the settlements on the territory of Kiev were still 25,000 years BC, and you took the Norman theory of the origin of Rus', while in the video about the Slavic languages you marked everything correctly, you have strange videos, you show the wrong history, then write on the map the history of Novgorod, and not Kiev, because Rus' of the Pollab Slavs was already in Kiev, there was already the main throne of Rus where the rulers of Kiev were buried in the dungeons of cathedrals and rules there on Askold and Dir, and before them other rulers.
95% of Russia is not Russian according to this map. They just conquered the rest of Russia (mostly Asia) as the Western Europeans conquered the native Americans. Conclusion: don't look for justice look for strength
4-7 века нашей эры - в Европе происходит процесс великого переселения народов, в результате которого с востока в Европу хлынули кочевые племена, что изменило всю карту Европы. Отсюда и делайте выводы
Mayby you don't know. But the most southern Galich principality (its capital was Galich on the Dniester) border was on the lower Danube where the Rurikids founded a Galich on the Danube (modern Galați in Romania) and Pereyaslavets on the Danube (southern residence of Sviatoslav the Conqueror).
Most historians believe that territory of proto-slavs was located at the present day Ukraine and territory of today's Russia was inhabited not by slavs but by ugro-finns till 14ct. Those ugro-finns were christianized and turned to slavic language under the rule of Moscovian ducks at 14-15 century when Rus' already ceased to exist. So the very origin of today's Russia is not in Rus' but in Moscow. Today's Russia has the same relation to Rus' as Romania to Roma!:)
@@logodok206 он хотел сказать про большинство украинцев .Почитать иностранные источники ,если не веришь российским ,не спасибо! Лучше пропаганду послушаю
This is a great ukrainian brainwashing, propaganda, for which “russians are asians, newcomers from asia, finno-Ugrians, muscovites, mongols, katsapi, golden hords, turks, slavic scandinavians, finns, not slaves” I think it’s worth saying nothing here. In general, they write about ukrainians, they say, those aryans, the descendants of ancient ukrainians, who allegedly dug up the black sea (for a long time in russia it was considered some kind of anecdote, a joke, until it became clear that this was a typical propaganda of russophobia, but to this day they remember it as about the most insane brainwashing (the event of the 14th year, of course, the aggressor will be called, considered, insulted if possible, exalted themselves, offended)
@@logodok206 Не, ну насчет прародины славян он прав: Полесье сейчас находится на Украине, но логический скачок к тому, что русские - "клятi мордвини" является абсолютной ложью. Это, например, как если бы я сейчас сказал, что Россия - главный преемник Пруссии, по причине вхождения в оную Кёнигсберга.
@@heavenhate7800 Don't get me wrong. I just saying that this is what people usually think when they hear Khaganate. If you are not one of those folk than I am very sorry for interrupting you. Have a nice day.
@@АндрейЕрмилов-х8п, ахахха, а жители Северной Македонии считают себя потомками Александра Македонского, но весь мир не признает это. Чувствую, с такой логикой украинцы скоро объявят себя наследниками Рима, Египта, Атлантиды и Империи Ситхов, а на все возражения будут говорить, что "жЫтеЛи сТрАнЫ сваю Ысторию лутттше знают!!1!"
Are you crazy? You appear Kyiv Rus in somewhere north? In 8-9 century? What about archeologists findings of Kyiv of 5 century? What about remnants of trypiĺlya perioud?
Lol, Kievan Rus is a 19 century historic term to describe the specific period when Kiev was a throne seat capital of Rus states. Kiev may have existed long before, and surely do exists long after the Rus was ransacked by Mongols, it doesn't mean it always was a part of that state. If you want your 5 century Kiev, go whatch the history of Kiev and see how it becomes a part of one state to another, from Khazar Khaganate to Soviet Union and independent Ukraine eventually.
О как лихо, Киевская русь произошла из ладоги! Тогда можно смело утверждать што Франция произошла из Кении а Британия из Индии. КартьІ из раздела альтернативной истории.
@@pawe7143 Man, you talking about historical truth but in the same time you refer to Moskovia as Russia. This is double standards. PS, I agree that this map have some mistakes.
It's absolutelly false history. Kievan Rus began from Polyan Principality where the Kyiv was a capital City. Rurik only killed 2 kings Ascolt and Dir and became a King.
@@nikostone1266 "Ruse" come from Russes were are called too the varangians, normans or gotlands. So ruses founded Aldeigjuborg (Old Ladoga), Holmgard (Novgorod), Turov and others cities, Kiev was founded by khazars. You leared history so poorly
To put it bluntly, just because it’s Russian history doesn’t mean it isn’t shared with Ukraine. Don’t mean to support putins bs, but given how far back this history is, maybe consider that this is both their history, regardless of the differences between them today.
@@gennadyfastgen9549 Украина (Вкраина) никогда не называлась окраина (пределы горизонта). Украина - в стране, в державе, земля..."Край, Мий милый край". Ипатеьевская летопись 1187 г "..ѡ нем же Ѹкраина много постона." "И еха и Смоленьска въ борзѣ и приѣхавшю же емѹ ко Ѹкраинѣ Галичькои.". С маленькой буквы переводится как : страна, держава....Украиные люди - державные люди (государственные.) Словения до 19 века называлась Крайна, есть Сербска Крайна, в Польше армия крайова ( государственная армия) Но, вы не славяне, поэтому не понимаете слова "край".
@@thenewparallel тогда спроси себя зачем Византии платить Киевским князьям.Зачем они вешали щит ворота Константинополя. Зачем построены Змииные валы длиной 3000км.
*You told the russian propaganda. Rus (Kyivan Rus) was only Ukrainian country with capital Kyiv. Novgorod was not a capital of Rus. Moscow is a capital of the Ugro-finnish (not Slavic) Russia. Nevsky was loyal to Mongols. Moscow was created in period of 1259-1272 by the Mongol Khan Mengu-Timur (Khan of the Golden Horde), and Moscovia (the modern Russia) as an ulus of Golden Horde was created in 1277 by the same Khan. Kremlin from Turkic means a fortess. Then Russia was a vassal of the Crimean Khanate until 1700. That year Russia appeared as a country for the first time in history. These all true facts are based on the historical documents.*
In that times "Ukraine" as a word doesnt even existed . Was the origins of the orthodox Rus and then Russia in their fight vs mongols , ottomans and Polish-Lithuania catholic commonwealth . Ukraine born as a province of the Russian Empire .
@@ralfjones9379 The Slavs came from Poland. But the Slavs, like most of the peoples of Europe, descended from ancient Indo-European tribes who lived on the territory of Russia (Yamnaya culture)
