Talk:East Slavs
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
| This article is within the scope of the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Contents |
[edit] Finns
I reverted the following change of the intro, made by genyo.
- The East Slavs are the ethnic group that evolved into the Belarusian and Ukrainian peoples. They also contributed a large linguistic component and and a minority ethnic component of the Russian people. Each of the many nationalities of Rus' has a separate history and complex origins. The historical origins of the Russian state, however, are chiefly those of the East Slav minority and the assimilated Finno-Ugric majority people of the North-Eastern Europe.
This theory is widely propagandized in modern nationalistic Ukrainian history. It even entered into Ukrainian school textbooks. Poor Russians. A century ago this people was attempted to be made from barbaric Huns, now they turn out to be ground-dugout dwelling finns. What next? Shipwrecked Martians turned into troglodytes?
If one wants to propagate this theory, this should be done at the main, Russians, page, where it can be compared against other theories, and only then into various summary and refernce pages. And as usual, Russians are nochalantly neglecting themselves. Mikkalai 03:42, 2 Jan 2005 (UTC)
[edit] plemena
Could this be translated as clan instead of tribal union or nations. The words seems to me to have more of familial feeling to it than union or nation imply. Vivafelis 03:27, 23 August 2005 (UTC)
- tribal clan seems fine to me but I am no specialist. --Irpen 16:30, August 23, 2005 (UTC)
- as my Russian|Ukrainian isn't really very good, I'm not certain either. How would you define plemena in Russian|Ukrainian? Vivafelis 18:08, 23 August 2005 (UTC)
I am not sure, I get the question. The closest English word to Племя (Plemya) is a tribe. --Irpen 18:34, 23 August 2005 (UTC)
- Well, I guess I'm asking an ethnographic/anthropological question. I'll do some research first and come back to the later. Thanks. --Vivafelis 00:56, 24 August 2005 (UTC)
FYI, the article on Clan states that "often, the distinguishing factor is that a clan is a smaller part of a larger society such as a tribe, a chiefdom, or a state" and even that "most clans are exogamous, meaning that its members cannot marry one another." According to these two criteria, Slavic "plemena" are tribes and not clans. --Itinerant1 22:03, 22 December 2005 (UTC)
- I deleted the reference to "Finno-Ugric origins" of the Russian State completely. The statement that the modern Russian people (not state!) included many assimilated Finn-Ugric inhabitants of Eastern Europen Plain is partly correct (but nobody knows the exact ratio of the assimilated finno-ugrs, and not only finno-ugrs were assimilated). But from the phrase it appears that Ukranian and Belurussian origins are "not mixed". That is nonsense: Ukrainians included many slavonized turcic tribes, and Belorussians also included many Baltic groups. It should be either mentioned that Ukrainians and Belorussians have mixed origins too, or the phrase deleted completely. I prefer the latter, because, obviously, any modern nation has "mixed origins". —Preceding unsigned comment added by Gestr (talk • contribs) 16:56, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Polans or Polyans?
Shouldn't the first of the twelfe "plemen" be spelled as "Polyans" (like Drevlyans) instead of "Polans" Goliath74 18:52, 22 December 2005 (UTC)
- "Polans" and "Polians" seem to be more common: [1], [2], [3]. —Preceding unsigned comment added by AndriyK (talk • contribs) 19:39, 22 December 2005 (UTC)
There were two distinct Slavic tribes with the same name ( pronounced "Polyane" ). One lived in what is now Western Poland, the other lived around Kiev, Ukraine. It seems that the terms "Polyans" and "Polians" refer only to the Eastern tribe, whereas the term "Polans" is more common and can refer to both. We can use the term "Polans" as long as we link it to "Polans (eastern)." --Itinerant1 22:23, 22 December 2005 (UTC)
[edit] The Book of Veles is a forgery
There's nothing controversial about it being a forgery. Get rid of the reference. This is a reputable article. And, hopefully, a reputable encyclopedia. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dennv (talk • contribs) 18:37, 8 February 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Slavic Settlement
This image is biased. It presents the early slavs wearing a costume wich appeared much later in SOME slavic countries, where Romanian ethnographic influences occured: Bulgaria, Serbia, Ukraine (Hutsuls), Poland (Gorals), Slovakia (Moravian Wallachia) (see Vlachs). Slovenia, Eastern Ukraine, northern Poland, Bielorussia, Russia and other slavic peoples (Serboi, Wends, etc) don`t present these elements. And they never did. Slavic peoples were influenced by the people they camed in contact with and mixed. Some with Romanians (hence the variants of the costumes), others were influenced by asiatic (tartar) costumes, while other never had a "traditional costume"... Greier 13:47, 29 March 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Cossaks?!
Cossaks are not a tribe!!! Who wrote that? Cossaks were free mercenaries who roamed the steppes of Ukraine at the beginning. After that they established they headquater (Sich) on the island of Khortytsia which is surrounded by Dnipro river. They colonized the less populated lands , establishing the new communities (lower Volga river and the Ural montains). After the destruction of Sich by the Russian empire they ran to lower Danube, lower Don, and Poland. Ekaterine the Great offered them an alternative to settle in Kuban. This way she would gain the well-developed agricultural lands and have military protection from the Caucasian region and Turks in the face of Cossaks. Anyway, calling Cossaks a Russian tribe is way off, considering the fact that they take their roots from Ukraine. Aleksandr Grigoryev (talk) 15:57, 11 May 2008 (UTC)
