Talk:Alexander Suvorov

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article incorporates text from the Encyclopædia Britannica Eleventh Edition, now in the public domain.
This article is within the scope of the following WikiProjects:
Other languages WikiProject Echo has identified Alexander Suvorov as a foreign language featured article. You may be able to improve this article with information from the Bulgarian or Russian language Wikipedias.

Contents

[edit] Kosa

Hello, Paranoid. =) ""Do you, by any chance, have a source that would indicate which meaning of "kosa" is the correct one for Suvorov's quote? The reason I'm asking is that I'm Russian, I've encountered that quote before and, though I've seen no hard evidence either way, "scythe" seemed to be the accepted meaning.

The current translation is correct. Kosa in this phrase refers to the braid in a wig. The word braid fits perfectly with pudra (facial and wig powder) and bukli (pl. from buklia or puklia, curl in a wig), while scythe does not fit at all.
You can sign and timestamp your posts by typing four tildas: ~~~~
--Gene s 07:47, 16 Nov 2004 (UTC)

For those wondering what this is all about, the noun "kosa" has more than one meaning in Russian - to wit:
1. A plait/braid (of hair)
2. A scythe
3. A spit (geographical - a small piece of land, i.e. sand or gravel, running into a body of water

[edit] Move to Alexander Suvorov

The name should be properly transliterated as Alexander, as per Transliteration of Russian into English. To avoid confusion, Aleksandr and Aleksander should also be mentioned in the article as possible variants.

This article has been renamed as the result of a move request. violet/riga (t) 09:42, 20 Mar 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Removing "alleged" massacre

The Massacre of Praga is a well-documented historical fact and calling it "alleged" is simply a factual error. The sentence "the alleged massacre of many civillians broke the spirits of the defenders" makes no sense anyway - if it never happened, how could it have broken their spirits? I'm removing the word.


The Massacre of Praga is one of many Polish nationalist myths. In any case virtually nothing about this conflict is "well documented", murders of civilians obviosly did happened, but they weren't on an exeptional scale according to 18th century European standarts. Famous Polish painting does not qualify as a "factual document"...(Fisenko 05:58, 29 August 2005 (UTC))


I'm not here to argue about this, since I'm just reporting what I thought was obvious. I see there's controversy though, and I don't want to make this into a nationalist edit war. A line about controversy between Polish and Russian historians on whether a massacre occurred and its scope would probably be more NPOV, however, than the unfortunate term "alleged" which suggests outright that it did not happen. Guildenstern42 14:09, 16 September 2005 (UTC)

It is just an accident, that I am involved into this debate because the article title Massacre of Praga seemed odd to me. I quickly checked and I found no references to the Battle of Warsaw called this way in entire E.L. internet as well as in any E.L. encyclopedias. I have too little knowledge on the topic to argue whether the massacre did in fact happened and I do believe that in Poland it is considered to be beyond debate. However, since "Massacre of Praga" is not an accepted term in English L. literature for these events, we should not use it simply to refer to somethinng as if it is a common name. Therefore, I just moved the Massacre of Praga to the Battle of Praga. Similar solution should be used here. We of course should mention the mass murder of civilians, since it is widely considered to be factual. --Irpen 05:59, 17 September 2005 (UTC)

[edit] The article and neutrality

The article states that the massacre of civilians in Warsaw is alledged.However historians and history doesn't dispute the fact of the massacre. --Molobo 10:28, 29 December 2005 (UTC)

Polish historians, you forget to say. Bug off, troll. --Ghirla | talk 10:31, 29 December 2005 (UTC)

Please stick to Civility on Wiki. --Molobo 10:37, 29 December 2005 (UTC)

I don't feed trolls. Go away. --Ghirla | talk 10:38, 29 December 2005 (UTC)
Ghirla, please behave. Molobo has a perfectly good point here. Google Books search for "1794+Praga+massacre" reveals 18 books, most of then not written by people with Polish sounding surname, with phrases like: "[Suvorov's] assault resulted in the infamous “massacre of Praga” on 24 October/ 4 November" (John T. Alexander), "...would massacre zo,ooo Pales in the storming of Praga in 1794..." (John. P Ledonne), "...army stormed Praga on November 4, 1794, a success which was followed by an appalling massacre of its inhabitants" (Charles Raymond Beazley), ..."Eighteen thousand human carcasses were carried away after the massacre..." (James Mackintosh). Now could you provide any sources, preferably not-Russian and in English (since you discard Polish ones and by Polish sounding authors) that argue the massacre is alleged?--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus Talk 14:19, 29 December 2005 (UTC)
My search discovered 254 entries for "praga+battle" as opposed to 85 entries for "praga+massacre", the large portion of the "massacre" citations belonging to the Poles - Andrzej Szczypiorski, Czeslaw Milosz, etc. Others were obviously influenced by their unsubstantiated claims. I'll let the matter pass however, until I have more time to ascertain the truth. --Ghirla | talk 15:49, 29 December 2005 (UTC)
Note that some of those 257 battle references are about the 1944 Warsaw Uprising.--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus Talk 21:24, 29 December 2005 (UTC)

If the object of Suvorov was to massacre, he could have unleashed the cossacks upon the city and ordered them to massacre. He could've added his own troops, not just the Cossacks, and his troops were extremely loyal to him. The casualties then would have been much higher then 20,000. Like five times higher. If there's a dispute, why not use common sense? You have well-armed and well-trained men versus recently defeated civilians. And in the massacre they can't at least kill five each? What're they slacking off? And you shouldn't be looking for Praga Battle vs. Praga Massacre, as Praga is not an English term. We call it Prague. For Prague Battle the Google Test showed 2,800k hits, whereas for the Prague Massacre it's only 449k hits. That's more then six times less! So it should be Prague Battle. Also, Wikipedia often uses the Google test, and as good wikipedians we must adhere to it. As per Molobo, he's quite infamous for his attacks on Russian history, and although he's being civil in this article, I can see why Ghirla would call him a troll. And I'm Californian, hence the only one here who doesn't have a national bias. User:ABCXYZ

[edit] non-notable statue

Image of a statue considered not notable by both romanians and russians. Moved from the original site of the battle of the Rimna river, on a hill, from political reasons and in order to be visited easily by russians tourists during communist era. It very courious that this ugly monument,a not notable monument (as an author of the article mentioned) situated in Romania has only a inscription in russian, and has escaped the any demolish or hidding (it was previosly situated out of sight near the river)attempt. It is very possible that some russians officials consider this monument a notable monument, but probable this is only a temporary situation.:-)CristianChirita

Suvorov monument near Focsani

Indeed a relatively ugly statue. I think a free-use photo of the Suvorov statue in Izmail might be useful, though, if anyone has one. Jbhood 15:39, 9 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Suvorov orders during the Praga massacre

Reading the recent Irpen's addition about him ordering the destruction of the bridge, I am reminded about something I read some time ago: that he didn't order the massacre and actually issued orders to prevent it, but the troops were out of control (looting and pillaging was common in such conflicts). It is possible I am confusing him and this massacre with some other, though - but if sb can find references to his activities and orders during the siege of Warsaw, it might be a useful addition.--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus Talk 22:45, 28 March 2006 (UTC)

Actually I read a source once which claimed he took part in the massacre and grabbed two chickens while laughing to Russian soldiers "let only those have their heads left to their bodies". I will search for this source.

- --Molobo 07:42, 29 March 2006 (UTC)

A Russian reference from 1884 regarding Poland which was occupied at the time by Russia can't be seen as objective. --Molobo 03:09, 29 March 2006 (UTC)

[1] This source claims Russians have tried to cover up the massacre by either trying to portay it as justice against Poles or claims that Suvorov wanted to help Poles. --Molobo 15:27, 29 March 2006 (UTC)


Template:Troll--Ghirla -трёп- 06:56, 29 March 2006 (UTC)

  • While indeed reminding the Wikipedia policy may be useful, please use the newly recreated template sparingly as it can easily be interpreted as a Personal attack. I have nominated it for TfD. abakharev 15:35, 29 March 2006 (UTC)
    • I want also to remind everybody to avoid editing other editor's comments, even if they are seen as untrue and potentially offensive. The exceptions are direct personal attacks, racial, ethnic slurs, etc. In all other cases editing other people's comments can be seen as a vandalism. I doubt the truthfulness of the Molobo's legend, but have no reasons to believe it was told in a bad faith. abakharev 16:05, 29 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] What's dubious?

Why are some users adding dubious tag to the existing reference without even commenting upon it here?

[edit] From my talk page

I would like your explanation on deletion of referenced source in Alexander Suvorov article. You made no comment why it was deleted. --Molobo 08:28, 6 April 2006 (UTC)

Please explain your deletions. Information shall be restored as soon as possible. --Molobo 09:40, 6 April 2006 (UTC)

OK, I have reverted the following edit: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Alexander_Suvorov&diff=47220556&oldid=46029580 . I actually thought that presenting information of an unattributed and unpublished Word file http://www.iskry.com.pl/fragmenty/polacy-kreml.rtf as an academic source proving something to be a fact and a book of 1884 as an example of works the intentions of Modern Russian historians to be a kind of joke. If I am mistaken and it was serious, please explain it on talk abakharev 02:55, 7 April 2006 (UTC)
pl:Iskry is a major Polish publishing house, and I would not call their publications a joke. On the other hand it would be much better if Molobo could give us information on which book this fragment is a part of, who is the author, perhaps some reviews and such.--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus Talk 04:05, 7 April 2006 (UTC)

From the book : Janusz TazbirPolacy na Kremlu i inne historyje Professor Janusz Tazbir is a very respectable historian and you can view his profile here: http://bazy.opi.org.pl/raporty/opisy/osoby/47000/o47205.htm --Molobo 09:13, 7 April 2006 (UTC)

Per this: Plese find objective resources, the book you quote can't be seen as objective as it represents Polish POV, and we need to cross examine its claims, as it is known Polish historians are quite paranoid towards Imperial Russia and their statements could be biased. Can you find an non-Polish source claiming the same fact ? --Ghirla -трёп- 09:30, 7 April 2006 (UTC)
Do you have any basis for questioning Janusz Tazbir other than his nationality? Tazbir is one of the most respected modern Polish historians, quoted in 151 books in Google Print.--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus Talk 14:03, 7 April 2006 (UTC)

Hmm most Polish historians are quite objective really. Where did you get that idea ? If you are adressing my opinion on Orthodoxy sources-well I would like some more info since Orthodoxy believes itself persecuted by Catholics, which leads to some absurdities-for example to demolition of flawed building used by Russian troops who left Warsaw as sign of persecution of Orthodox faith. But please adress that in other articles. --Molobo 09:45, 7 April 2006 (UTC)

The fragment comes from that book: Janusz Tazbir, Polacy na Kremlu i inne historyje (Poles on Kreml and other stories), Iskry, 2005, ISBN 8320717957. Tazbir is a perfectly rebutable source, and the fact that we have a fragment online only makes it better.--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus Talk 22:40, 28 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Memoirs of Czartoryski ?

This is very unreliable, Czartoryski was a foreign minister of Russia who tried to become ruler of Poland by being a servant of tsar. Please use reliable sources. Btw why are Pushking quotes delete d and information about Russian attempts to justify or cover up the mass murder ? --Molobo 12:23, 7 April 2006 (UTC)

Well, Czartoryski might have his own POV - who doesn't - but his memoires, as many others, are a primary source. In the end all modern books have to be based on the older, usually much more POVed sources - otherwise we are dealing with fiction. The trick is, when using old sources, to be able to NPOV them.--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus Talk 17:29, 10 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Storm in a teacup

I went over 10 English book that mention the battle of Praga (and please note that most of them do indeed use the term massacre). Not a single one of them contain clear reference that Suvorov either encouraged or tried to prevent massacre. They often use the geround construction 'Suvorov massacred...' but I think it is fairly obvious that they mean 'Suvorov forces massacred...' and not that Suvorov himself was anywhere near the frontlines slaying Poles. Considering that we currently have no references for the claim that Suvorov instigated the massacre, and the counterclaims are supported by the 19th century Russian source and some webpage, I'd suggest that both claims are moved to talk until we can find any proper, academic and preferably English citations for Suvorov's role in the massacre.--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus Talk 23:03, 28 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Suvorov's Armenian ancestory

I have became a connection link between two parties User:Eupator and User:Eliweinerman. Eli insists that the Armenian ancestory of Suvorov is an Urbam legend. On the other hand Eupator isnsists that Suvorov is clearly half-Armenian.

From my talk page:

Hello Alex, I still think the wording is unencyclopedic and it's better not to mention it at all if it is unsourced. Basically if it isn't verified 100% percent leave it out. Yeah Manuk is an Armenian name but that doesn't mean anyone with the name is Armenian? Мать Суворова — Авдотья (Евдокия) Федосеевна Суворова, в девичестве Манукова, происходила из обрусевшего армянского рода. Sources: [2], [3], [4]--Eupator 15:28, 1 June 2006 (UTC)

Eli's arguments are sent to me via E-mail, basically it referes to the genalogy of Manukov's that appear to be Russian nobility. Similar argument between the two is also about the ancestory of Mikhail Lazarev.

Please discuss your points on the talk pages. abakharev 06:16, 18 June 2006 (UTC)

No argument regarding Mikhail Lazarev. He is indeed not related to Armenian Lazarevs. Point about Suvorov still remains and there are sufficient sources for that.--Eupator 13:44, 1 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Importance rating

Assigned importance=high (same rating as the Elder Moltke, I would say) Jbhood 18:32, 9 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Bayonet quote

Any source for the translation: "A bullet will fool it, a bayonet won't say 'nyet'?" A clumsy translation at best, in my opinion. I'll revert it in a couple of days if no-one gives a reason not to. Jbhood 13:15, 5 August 2006 (UTC)

Agreed. He actually said diffferent.--Nixer 18:31, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

OK, done. Jbhood 12:15, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

Quote was deleted, now restored. Please give a reason if editing or deleting it again. Jbhood 10:12, 29 August 2006 (UTC)

Of course, if he were writing today Suvorov might say something like: "...the bayonet is a baaaad dude". Jbhood 12:11, 29 August 2006 (UTC)

You translated much more clumsy, dude. I just wanted Suvorov's name to be known to English speakers.

Oh, dear. Well, I think this is a significant quote, and should stay in in any case. Do you have any other proposal? Jbhood 17:21, 29 August 2006 (UTC)

Let me try this again. I am sorry that I used the word "clumsy". All the same, I think there must be a better translation of this quotation. Jbhood 17:39, 29 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Duffy

So, no one here has read Duffy's book about Suvorov and his Italian campaign (Eagles Over the Alps)? It seems to be pretty well done, and he also briefly addresses Praga. Seems like a glaring ommission among the "further reading" section at least. Once I finish the work, I may add some detail to the Italian campaign section. (salamander, don't feel like signing on right now) --171.161.160.10 13:10, 17 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] suvorov

i cant beleive there is no mention of the atoll in the cook islands named after this man. can someone amend this wiki?> —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 69.181.198.164 (talk) 05:40, 20 January 2007 (UTC).

[edit] Thousand face man name Aleksandr Vasiljevits Suvorov

Dear Participants. Something do not fit at all in this history. Here we see again what lack of knowledge of other languages than English and Russian means. Many important things from Aleksandr Vasiljevits life are totally missing from this history. There are in several Finnish sources clear mentions that Suvorov was a Finnish, not of Russian origin. One even says, published in countrys leading newspaper few years ago, that his original name was not Suvorov. He translated it to Russian when he entered into service at age of 12. His roots are said to come from Novgorod Karelian family, whose ancestors have been traced from Finnish church books in Savo in middle of Finland. And this he had said to many,including Catherine the Great who summed it in her answer "What about it. I have born in Germany". Sometimes during the later half of 1600 ie. after 1650 the family moved to Ingermanland. And later from Ingermanland to Novgorod. There is one fact which support this. Suvorov could not speak during his whole lifetime fluent Russian, he spoke it with Karelian dialect. He spoke Finnish with Karelian dialect. All these are proven facts. This history mentions that Suvorov served in Finland only during 1742-1743 war against Sweden. But after that he spent a year in Finland in words of Russian historian Timisheko-Rubanin writing in 1913: He (Suvorov) received order personally from Carherine to go to Finland to inspect the Russian garrisons in border area after Gustav III had made his "coup d`etat" in Sweden on August 19,1772. And so he did. He travelled without his uniform, dressed to like Finnish peasant and slept overnights in Finnish peasant houses. How could this be possible if he could not speak Finnish? Suvorov wrote in Finnish (po tshuhonski) his notes of the condition of Russian garrisons. He also reported to Catherine of the feelings of ordinary people in Finland which shows that he spent time also in Swedish part of Finland. Suvorov was ordered again to so called Old-Finland in early 1790 as the highest commanding officer. His task was to build a new fortification belt to Russo Swedish borderland to secure St.Petersburg against possible Swedish attack. Under his command served Colonel Fabian Steinheil and Dutch born Engineer Captain Jan Peter van Suchtelen. In his command were 40.000 soldiers who built to Lake Saimaa four war canals Kutvele, Kukonharju, Telataipale and Käyhkää. The Russians built up also "Saimaa Fleet" (Saijmaiskij Flota). In addition Suvorov built a new chain of field garrisons named Kyminlinna, Ruotsinsalmi, Järvitaipale, Utti, Liikkala and Taavetti which formed the outer defence garrison chain. Also old Viipuri (Viborg) and Käkisalmi (Kexholm) fortresses were strenghtened. Most of his time Suvorov lived in Hamina (Fredrikshamn) in the house of a doctor´s widow Mrs Griin. He was then a bitter old man who wrote letters to his daughter but not to his son. He was not in any connection with his former wife Varvara Ivanovna Prozorovskaja. Evenings Suvorov spent with Mrs Griin talking of his Finnish roots and his career as an officer in Russian Army. Sometimes he started drink and that lasted for couple of weeks. A habit which followed him all his life. He seemed to be loneless poor old man. Lucky for Suvarov he was ordered on the last days of December 1792 back to St.Petersburg to take the Command of Crimean Army. One Finnish officer Yrjö (Georg) Maunu (Magnus) von Sprengtporen, so called Anjala League man met Suvorov in Prag in 1799. His classic comment was: "Ukko on sotilaallinen nero, omituisesti käyttäytyväksi hulluksi joka noituu kuin lappalainen." (Old man is military genius,for strange behaiving grazy, who witches like Lapp.) When crossing the Alps Suvorov was drunken and he song old Finnish folklores for his soldiers. He was honoured to Count Ryminski after Roma. His last wish was that only a small brass plate where should be written in Finnish: "Tässä lepää Suvorov." Brass plate it was, as he had wished, but his words were written in Russian. Thus, who this man with thousand faces really was?

JN

[edit] Aleksanteri Vasilinpoika Suvenvaara

This is the answer to a question I asked before. There is a good Finnish book written by Kauko Rekola "Suvorov - Generalissimus - Genious" which is based to documents and other interesting old written material without any attempts to exaggerate Suvorov´s military participation to the battles (just as his role in Russo - Swedish war in 1741-1743 at the age of 12 to 14 year half grown youngster). His task seems to have been interprayer because he spoke Finnish. Finland´s leading newspaper published on July 28, 2004 a large article of Suvorov, where his roots were described and his career in Russian army. This article resulted one letter to editorial staff also published in the newspaper and which I think should also been published here to make things clear and stop any speculation.

"Thanks of Aleksanteri Suvorov article published on 28.07.2004, which - at last - makes to large public clear, that the genious war chief was clearly of Finnish origin. Man talked whole his life poor Russian, and when learned it well he pointed his Finnish backround by talking Russian unproperly.

Suvorov was not Ingermanlander (by born), but from Borovitsi (Porovitsa = Reinder twing) district born in village of Kamenka (Kivelä). In now a days maps about 150 km east from Novgorod you find names Bol.Kamennik, (Malaja Kamennik) and Kontshansko - Suvorovskoje. (Presumably the last mentioned by its current name is old village of Kamenka / Kivelä.)

The area is so called Novgorod Karelia, which is generally identifyd to Tver (Tihveri) Karelia. For this historical Finnish inhabited area, today is recommended to use name Tytär - Karjala (Daughter - Karelia).

Suvorov himself told of his ancestors who escaped from Finland (they were of Orthodoks fate) in 1622 named Naum and Suvor. In 1791 a Swedish diplomat Jennings, when visiting Suvorov in Hamina (Fredrikshamn) on his way to St.Petersburg, wrote down the enigmatic explanation Suwara and Sywe wara (which have been explaned to mentioned Karelian name).

Vaara (high hill) is rarely deep (syvä), but in Karelia are many Suvi-, Suur-, and Suenvaaras. (Suenvaara / Suvenvaara = Wolf´s vaara.)

Signed Lauri Heikkilä.

Those marked in brankets are my additions from other Finnish sources.

JN

[edit] the Praga 'massacre' - who cares?

too much attention to 'massacre'. Beter hold it in Battle of Praga articles. During wars of Suvorov, too many people died, and those few thousands of poles are not significant. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.69.240.51 (talk) 00:30, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Infobox

Copied from Template talk:Infobox Military Person
Hello everyone,

On the Suvorov talk page there's been a message under the Wikiproject Biography template stating that "an appropriate infobox may need to be added to this article." This message has been there since at least September 2006 and since then apperantly no one has bothered to add an infobox to the article or remove the message. I decided to add one with this edit. I'm not sure whether I overdid it with information or what, but the infobox was removed a few days later by Ghirlandajo (talk · contribs).

Now, mind you, I really hate to see the work thrown in the trash without any apperant reason stated in the edit summary. However, as the aforementioned gentleman appears to be an admin, my only conclusion is that he knows what he's doing and an infobox does not belong in that article...for whatever reason that is. If that is the case, the message asking for one needs to be removed from the talk page so that others won't make the same mistake. My other conclusion is that the users who dominate that article just don't like infoboxes. In any case, I haven't reverted the edits but instead have come here wondering what you all think on the matter.

Regards, 71.112.145.211 (talk) 09:37, 5 April 2008 (UTC)