Misplaced Pages

Latest revision as of 18:36, 3 January 2025

The common English-language name for the medieval state centred around modern-day Kyiv is Kievan Rus' Although the modern-day capital of Ukraine is commonly spelled Kyiv in current English, per the Misplaced Pages policy WP:COMMONNAME and the community consensus outlined on this talk page in April 2021, we use the spelling for the medieval state that is the more common name in English-language historiography, which is Kievan Rus', not Kyivan Rus'. This is not a comment on the identity or association of the medieval state to any modern country, language or culture; it is merely the spelling by which it is more commonly known in English-language literature.Please do not request that Kievan Rus' be changed to Kyivan Rus': any such request will be denied.

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Kievan Rus' article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic. New to Misplaced Pages? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help. Assume good faith Be polite and avoid personal attacks Be welcoming to newcomers Seek dispute resolution if needed Article policies Neutral point of view No original research Verifiability

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10Auto-archiving period: 3 months

This  level-4 vital article is rated B-class on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Rusyns Mid‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Rusyns, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Rusyns on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.RusynsWikipedia:WikiProject RusynsTemplate:WikiProject RusynsRusyns Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale. Belarus High‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Belarus, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Belarus on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.BelarusWikipedia:WikiProject BelarusTemplate:WikiProject BelarusBelarus High This article has been rated as High-importance on the importance scale. Ukraine Top‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Ukraine, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Ukraine on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.UkraineWikipedia:WikiProject UkraineTemplate:WikiProject UkraineUkraine Top This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale. Russia: History / Human geography Top‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Russia, a WikiProject dedicated to coverage of Russia on Misplaced Pages. To participate: Feel free to edit the article attached to this page, join up at the project page, or contribute to the project discussion.RussiaWikipedia:WikiProject RussiaTemplate:WikiProject RussiaRussia Top This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale. This article is supported by the history of Russia task force. This article is supported by the human geography of Russia task force. Former countries This article is within the scope of WikiProject Former countries, a collaborative effort to improve Misplaced Pages's coverage of defunct states and territories (and their subdivisions). If you would like to participate, please join the project.Former countriesWikipedia:WikiProject Former countriesTemplate:WikiProject Former countriesformer country Middle Ages High‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Middle Ages, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the Middle Ages on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Middle AgesWikipedia:WikiProject Middle AgesTemplate:WikiProject Middle AgesMiddle Ages High This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

The contentious topics procedure applies to this page. This page is related to the Balkans or Eastern Europe, which has been designated as a contentious topic. Editors who repeatedly or seriously fail to adhere to the purpose of Misplaced Pages, any expected standards of behaviour, or any normal editorial process may be blocked or restricted by an administrator. Editors are advised to familiarise themselves with the contentious topics procedures before editing this page.

This article has been mentioned by a media organization: Noam Cohen (31 May 2022). "Misplaced Pages acts as a check on Putin's false view of history". The Washington Post. Since the Russian invasion, the English Misplaced Pages articles about the historical figures and topics Putin invoked have been racking up pop-star numbers. ... Also with Bandera-type numbers is the article about Kievan Rus' (just under a million views), the ancient kingdom led by Vladimir the Great (225,000).

This article has previously been nominated to be moved. Please review the prior discussions if you are considering re-nomination. Discussions: RM, Kievan Rus' → Kyivan Rus', Not moved, 19 April 2021, discussion

Archives

Archive 1 Archive 2 Archive 3 Archive 4 Archive 5 Archive 6 Archive 7 Archive 8 Archive 9 Archive 10

This page has archives. Sections older than 90 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 5 sections are present.

The slavic tribe of Rus'

This article criticaly overlooked the role of Polanian tribe in Kyivan Rus'. Even if, as this article suggests, vikings were the first to be called "Rus'", Kyivan Rus' was centered around Polanian tribe, Rus' vikings were representatives of Polanian tribe, all their conquerings in Eastern Europe became Polanian conquerings, all tribute they gathered from Northern slavic tribes was coming to Polanian center of Kyiv, and Polanians themself started to call themself Rus' in 852 as the chronicle suggests. Other slavic tribes like Ilmen Slavs or Kriviches never called themself Rus', they were using this name for Polanians, yet you mentioned them like equals. Polanians were basically metropoly of Kyivan Rus'. I'm not sure if anyone here cares about this article, but if you do - please put this as the suggestion. 46.200.75.110 (talk) 15:51, 13 July 2024 (UTC)

Well, I expected at least some form of reply. 46.200.75.110 (talk) 16:46, 21 July 2024 (UTC)

Might need time to research and implement. If the tribe is notable that is. Nakonana (talk) 21:10, 30 July 2024 (UTC)

Please also take into the account that this article claims Kyivan Rus' was an amalgamation of principalities at certain period of time, which is not the case because at this point they were no longer part of Kyivan Rus', Rus' as a name only applied to the territory of Central Ukraine, which also matches the territory of Polanians. So, it's better to consider that this principalities have separated and were no longer part of Kyivan Rus' in the article. 46.200.75.110 (talk) 11:20, 16 August 2024 (UTC)

If you want to have particular things to be included in the article, you could write up said text (with sources) here on the talk page (as you seem knowledgeable about the topic), and someone might then be so kind to add it to the article for you :) Nakonana (talk) 12:15, 16 August 2024 (UTC)

Would you be satisfied with non English speaking sources? 46.200.75.110 (talk) 16:39, 16 August 2024 (UTC)

Non-English sources are explicitly allowed on English Misplaced Pages per WP:NONENG (even if English sources are preferred). Nakonana (talk) 12:15, 19 August 2024 (UTC)

Well then there are plenty of things I want to change so here is my text variant:"Kievan Rus', also known as Kyivan Rus', was the first East Slavic state in Eastern Europe from the late 9th to the mid-13th century. Conquering and encompassing a variety of polities and peoples, including East Slavic, Norse, and Finnic, it was ruled by the Kyivan Rurik dynasty, founded by the Varangian prince Rurik. The name was coined by Russian historians in the 19th century to describe the period when Kiev was at the center. At its greatest extent in the mid-11th century, Kievan Rus' stretched from the White Sea in the north to the Black Sea in the south and from the headwaters of the Vistula in the west to the Taman Peninsula in the east, dominating over the East Slavic tribes.

According to the Primary Chronicle, the first rulers of Rus' were two princes Askold and Dir(r. 862-882), who carried out a successful raid on Constantinople. First major territorial expansions of Kyivan state began during Oleg the Wise (r. 879–912). He established Kyiv's control over the Varangian-Greek trade route and used it to gather tribute from the conquered Slavic tribes northern of Kyiv.

The state began to decline in the late 11th century, gradually shrinking in population and size as more Principalities went their own way independently from Kyiv

In the south, in the area around Kiev, were the Poliane, the Drevliane to the west of the Dnieper, and the Severiane to the east. To their north and east were the Vyatichi, and to their south was forested land settled by Slav farmers, giving way to steppelands populated by nomadic herdsmen.. In the northern region around Novgorod were the Ilmen Slavs and neighboring Krivichi, who occupied territories surrounding the headwaters of the West Dvina, Dnieper and Volga rivers. To their north, in the Ladoga and Karelia regions, were the Finnic Chud tribe."

These are changes I want to include for now, and here are sources:

History of Ukraine, Fourth Edition, by Orest Subtelny, page 57:"As more and more principalities went their own way, Kiev's wealth, population, and territory shrank until it ranked little higher than other princi- palities. It was at this stage that the city of Kiev and its surrounding lands became referred to as Ruskaia zemlia, the land of Rus', in the narrow sense of the word."

Page 45-46 (about first rulers of Rus' Askold and Dir). Page 47 (Oleg the Wise and his tribute gatherings). 46.200.75.110 (talk) 17:52, 19 August 2024 (UTC)

It's not clear what exactly you want to modify, can you highlight the changes? If there are too many of them, it's better to discuss them one-by-one.

Also, note that Subtelny mentions "the land of Rus', in the narrow sense of the word" which implies that there is also the broad sense, which corresponds to the whole Kievan Rus' (the adjective is a much later addition of course). Alaexis_¿question? 20:09, 20 August 2024 (UTC)

I have written the text I want to be included in the article for now, scroll higher.

Well, this broad sense of Kyivan Rus' didn't exist at this point of time, this is why Subtelny mentions that Kyivan Empire has "declined" and "shrank in size", until only it's ethnic metropolitan Ukrainian territories were Kyivan Rus'. Broad sense of Kyivan Rus' is just like any other country and it's empire. 46.200.75.110 (talk) 07:35, 21 August 2024 (UTC)

If you expect other editors to compare your version and the current one and find changes this can take a long time.

To make things easier for other editors, I'm asking you to list the changes: what you propose to add, what you propose to remove and what are the sources for each change (Subtelny or smth else). Alaexis_¿question? 19:26, 21 August 2024 (UTC)

Basically write something along the lines of:

I suggest the following passage:

"{{tq|copy and paste the relevant text passage from the current wiki article here}}"

be changed to:

"{{tq|write your suggested text for the new passage here}}<ref>{{Citation| author=Orest Subtelny | title=History of Ukraine | edition=4 | date= | page=57 | quote=As more and more principalities went their own way...}}</ref>" Nakonana (talk) 13:33, 22 August 2024 (UTC)

Well then, here it is, I'll provide additional sources in case something is unclear:"

"... was the first East Slavic state and later an amalgam of principalities in Eastern Europe.. "

Change to:

" was the first east slavic state in Eastern Europe"

Source:History of Ukraine, Subtelny, page 57, quote:"As more and more principalities went their own way, Kiev's wealth, population, and territory shrank until it ranked little higher than other princi- palities. It was at this stage that the city of Kiev and its surrounding lands became referred to as Ruskaia zemlia, the land of Rus', in the narrow sense of the word"

Current text:"Encompassing a variety of polities and peoples"

Change to:"Conquering and encompassing variety of polities and people's"

Source:Subtelny, page 47 about Oleg the Wise, most of the tribes were conquered and opposed with tribute by Kyivan prince through Varangian-Greek trade route

Current text:"uniting the East Slavic tribes"

Change to:"dominating over East Slavic tribes".

Source:Subtelny, History of Ukraine, page 47, about Oleg

Current text:"According to the Primary Chronicle, the first ruler to unite East Slavic lands into what would become Kievan Rus' was Oleg the Wise (r. 879–912). He extended his control from Novgorod south along the Dnieper river valley to protect trade from Khazar incursions from the east, and took control of the city."

Change to:"

According to the Primary Chronicle, the first rulers of Rus' were two princes Askold and Dir(r. 862-882), who carried out a successful raid on Constantinople. First major territorial expansions of Kyivan state began during Oleg the Wise (r. 879–912). After setting himself up as prince of Kyiv he took control over the Varangian-Greek trade route and used it to gather tribute from the conquered Slavic tribes to the north of Kyiv.

Source:Subtelny History of Ukraine, page 45-46 (about first rulers Askold and Dir), page 47(about Oleg)

Current text:The state began to decline in the late 11th century, gradually disintegrating into various rival regional powers throughout the 12th century

Change to:The state began to decline in the late 11th century, gradually shrinking in population and size as more Principalities went their own way independently from Kyiv

Source:Subtelny, History of Ukraine, page 57, quote:"was the first east slavic state in Eastern Europe"

Source:History of Ukraine, Subtelny, page 57, quote:"As more and more principalities went their own way, Kiev's wealth, population, and territory shrank until it ranked little higher than other princi- palities. It was at this stage that the city of Kiev and its surrounding lands became referred to as Ruskaia zemlia, the land of Rus', in the narrow sense of the word" 46.200.75.110 (talk) 17:21, 22 August 2024 (UTC)

You seem to ignore the existing sources in the article. E.g., there are sources supporting both "amalgam of principalities" and "uniting the East Slavic tribes".

In case of the "amalgam of principalities", I don't see how the quote from Subtelny supports the change you propose. Subtelny only says that the Kiev land was called Russkaya Zemlya in the narrow sense. It is implied that Russkaya Zemlya in the broad sense included other principalities.

Also, please see and take into account @Nederlandse Leeuw's comment below. Alaexis_¿question? 20:12, 23 August 2024 (UTC)

Yes, so I propose to change them. Subtelny says that Kyivan Rus' shrank in size, to the point when only the territory around Kyiv was identified as Kyivan Rus'. There's no statement it became an "amalgam of principalities". Again, this broad sense of Kyivan Rus' didn't exist at this point of time because this principalities weren't identified as Rus'. Is that clear? 46.200.75.110 (talk) 09:38, 24 August 2024 (UTC)

You've ignored what I said about taking into account the existing sources. Alaexis_¿question? 19:01, 24 August 2024 (UTC)

"So I propose to change them" that's what I said. 37.52.10.212 (talk) 11:41, 25 August 2024 (UTC)

Hello? 46.200.75.110 (talk) 15:40, 28 August 2024 (UTC)

The "amalgam is principalities" is supported by a source (Martin 2009). Your claim that "this broad sense of Kyivan Rus' didn't exist at this point of time" is not supported by the the quote from Subtelny you gave earlier (It was at this stage that the city of Kiev and its surrounding lands became referred to as Ruskaia zemlia, the land of Rus', in the narrow sense of the word. Subtelny is talking about the contemporary naming whereas Kyivan Rus is a historical term. Alaexis_¿question? 20:07, 19 September 2024 (UTC)

This are the pages of a document I listed, here are corresponding pages of actual book:45-46(26-27),47(28),57(38)

Also a few other changes I propose:

Current text:In the northern region around Novgorod were the Ilmen Slavs and neighboring Krivichi, who occupied territories surrounding the headwaters of the West Dvina, Dnieper and Volga rivers. To their north, in the Ladoga and Karelia regions, were the Finnic Chud tribe. In the south, in the area around Kiev, were the Poliane, the Drevliane to the west of the Dnieper, and the Severiane to the east. To their north and east were the Vyatichi, and to their south was forested land settled by Slav farmers, giving way to steppelands populated by nomadic herdsmen.

Change:just swap the text and put Polanians in the first place, as they are the most prominent tribe, so it would be:"In the south, in the area around Kiev, were the Poliane, the Drevliane to the west of the Dnieper, and the Severiane to the east. To their north and east were the Vyatichi, and to their south was forested land settled by Slav farmers, giving way to steppelands populated by nomadic herdsmen.. In the northern region around Novgorod were the Ilmen Slavs and neighboring Krivichi, who occupied territories surrounding the headwaters of the West Dvina, Dnieper and Volga rivers. To their north, in the Ladoga and Karelia regions, were the Finnic Chud tribe."

Source, Subtelny, History of Ukraine, book page 21 quote:"Of these, the most prominent were Polanians, who lived in Central Ukraine, on the banks of Dnieper."

Book page 25 quote:"To one of these processes we have already alluded - the slow amalgama- tion of the numerous, fragmented East Slav communal units... in the area in which Kiev would arise.

Book page 26 quote:"Murky though our knowledge of this period is, it can be assumed that the East Slavs in general and the Polianians in par- ticular were well on the way to laying the foundation for the vast political, commercial, and cultural entity that would be called Kievan Rus'." 46.200.75.110 (talk) 18:18, 22 August 2024 (UTC)

This is information that is already available in this article with proper citations. The only difference is that 46.200.75.110 wants to emphasise, suggest ot claim that the Polyane were already called Rus' and had already founded Kyivan Rus' before the Varangians arrived and conquered Kyiv in the late 9th century. That flies directly in the face of the literary, linguistic and archaeological evidence that most of these Slavonic, Finno-Ugric or other peoples were tributaries of the Khazar Khaganate when the Varangians (supposedly under Askold and Dir, later under Oleh and/or Ihor) came and took over control, forcing these peoples to stop paying the Khazars and instead pay tribute to them.

The idea that the Polianians in particular were well on the way to laying the foundation for the vast political, commercial, and cultural entity that would be called Kievan Rus' is just anti-Normanism through a backdoor. Granted, the Varangians didn't build the city of Kyiv. But the Polyane didn't establish the network of tribute-paying peoples dependent on the city of Kyiv after the Varangians conquered it.

At Calling of the Varangians, I have outlined how modern scholars such as Paul Magocsi and Janet Martin have reconstructed how Kyivan Rus' was established. It wasn't by invitation, nor did a state already exist; the Varangians began by raiding, then by what we might call wikt:Brandschatzung, and eventually demanding regular tribute of subdued peoples. That might not be a flattering story for the local Slavs, but that's what the evidence says. Similar to how the Romans brought political state structures to much of Europe by conquests in places where there had not been states before. Pretending that there were states before is just wishful thinking and pseudohistory, which is at the core of every anti-Normanist argument.

Incidentally, I've been working on Kyi, Shchek and Khoryv a bit, as well as Kyi dynasty. As Wikipedians, we need to be very careful in trying to separate fact from fiction. We're not here to try and confirm what we already believe; we're here to summarise what reliable sources have concluded, even if that is not what we expected or wanted them to conclude. NLeeuw (talk) 21:44, 23 August 2024 (UTC)

No my friend, it's not even available in the first sentences of the article for an average reader. Essentially, most of my current proposed changes do not even discuss Polanians. The fact that Polanians were called Rus' shouldn't be a mystery either. Whether Rus' as word linguistically came from Polanians or Vikings we will never know for sure and it doesn't really matter. Yes, Polanians did payed tribute to khazars, this is even what khazar elite said about them according to Primary Chronicle:"Evil is this tribute, prince. We have won this tribute with a sabre, but the weapon of these called a sword. This men shall impose tribute upon us and upon other lands."

The fact that you took Subtelny's quote and called it "pure anti normanism" is even all more laughable, because this is what he has to say about this:"There are, therefore, good reasons to view the rise of Kiev not as the exclusive achievement of one ethnic group or another, but as the result of a complex Slavic/Scandinavian interrelationship. Recently, Omeljan Pritsak has taken this point further and argued that the entire question of the ethnic origins of Rus' is irrelevant. In his view, the original Rus' were a multiethnic and multilingual trading company that tried to control the trade routes between the Baltic and the Mediterranean and in the process established the political entity called Kievan Rus'." This shows an unprofessionalism regarding this topic from your side.

Yes, Polanians didn't established a tribute network for the most part, but they owned it as well as the vikings, because they were part of one company/organisation/state established in Central Ukraine through their complex interrelationship and similar interests. And they highly benefited from it, as their lands became or remained the core Kyivan Rus' culture and literature. So I don't make up anything of my own, I just try to bring this article closer to reality. 46.200.75.110 (talk) 10:45, 24 August 2024 (UTC)

Regarding this edit which emphasises the role of Polans, I will mention again what is said in Viking Rus (2004): "it can be one more artificial attempt of the compiler to find an explanation for the introduction of the name of Rus to the territories at Middle Dnieper". Mellk (talk) 11:17, 26 October 2024 (UTC)

This topic was created by other person. I created new topic below. Shahray (talk) 11:34, 26 October 2024 (UTC)

Hello? 46.200.75.110 (talk) 08:20, 30 August 2024 (UTC)

You've proposed changes and got negative feedback from several editors. At this point two courses of action would make sense

• You modify your proposal taking into account the feedback you've received and we discuss it.
• You request external feedback regarding your current proposal from uninvolved editors via WP:RFC or other channels.

Alaexis_¿question? 20:11, 19 September 2024 (UTC)

Should I create new topic? 46.200.75.110 (talk) 17:06, 21 September 2024 (UTC)

Yes, that would help. Alaexis_¿question? 20:57, 21 September 2024 (UTC)

No. All I'm reading so far is some original research based on a selective, personal reading of the Primary Chronicle (PVL), an often highly unreliable, late, biased, and self-contradicting WP:PRIMARY source. Essentially, 46.200.75.110 seems to be making an anti-Normanism argument, claiming that the Polans (eastern) (Polanians, Polyane, Polyanians etc.) were always called Rus', always called themselves Rus', and that the Swedish Varangians who conquered Kyiv around 880 were not Rus'. This hypothesis has already been conclusively disproven and refuted by scholars decades ago, and we do not have to take it seriously. Anthropology of early Kyivan Rus' is extremely complicated and controversial, with the PVL frequently contradicting itself over what the word Rus' even means and to whom it should be applied. A drive-by comment on a talk page saying we should ignore the scholarly consensus because some person on the Internet has a different selective personal reading of the PVL is nothing to take seriously.

Similarly, theories about when and how Kyivan Rus' "declined" or "fell apart" and such should be evaluated skeptically. The traditional argument suggests that this state took 186 years (from 1054 to 1240) to "decline", while others say it wasn't really a "state" until Volodimer' got baptised around 988, so we end up with a state that was only really a "state" for 66 years (conveniently coinciding with the supposedly perfect reigns of Volodimer' and Yaroslav and constituting a "golden age"; all other knyazi were supposedly lesser) of its c. 360-year-long existence from c. 880 to 1240. It might surprise you, but I'm not convinced by the traditional argument. It's a modern myth that pre-Christian Kyivan Rus' and post-Yaroslav Kyivan Rus' were times of constant war, chaos and misery, and that the time in between was a perfect golden age unlike any other. And I'm even less impressed by a drive-by comment suggesting another simplistic personal interpretation of how Kyivan Rus' disappeared. NLeeuw (talk) 16:40, 22 August 2024 (UTC)

Umm, no, nothing of what you said correspond to my views or the changes I proposed. Essentially, I have already provided a non Primary source.

Answering to your acquisitions, I do not support anti normanism, as the rise of Kyiv was contributed by both ethnicities.

I do not argue about when Kyivan Rus' declined or how it did, what I say is that it shouldn't be interpreted as disintegration into "an amalgam of principalities", but rather that this principalities have separated from Kyivan Rus' and were no longer part of it. Sorry, the most straightforward example is how we do not call former British colonies "an amalgam of British states".

I personally don't think Rus' was miserable even after it declined and shrank to the size it basically began as, Kyiv was still one of the largest and welthiest cities of a country that still was relevant and had marked huge influence. 46.200.75.110 (talk) 10:41, 24 August 2024 (UTC)

Did Oleg the Wise "unite East Slavic lands"?

I know from a historiographical point of view, this cannot be correct (there were obviously many more East Slavs who were not ruled by the Rus' Vikings, whether it was the semi-legendary Oleg or anyone else) - but even from a point of view of the chroniclers, I don't believe there is anything in the texts to justify "East Slavic lands". Happy to be proved wrong. Kobzar1917 (talk) 09:12, 25 September 2024 (UTC)

There was no Kieven Rus. It was simply Rus

dont know why this is viable. Kieven Rus as a term didn't come until the 19th-20th century 149.62.208.189 (talk) 10:22, 26 September 2024 (UTC)

Kievan rus

@Mellk, explain how does this contradicts my changes? Shahray (talk) 11:36, 26 October 2024 (UTC)

In the discussion under § The slavic tribe of Rus', there is clearly no consensus to include additional emphasis on Polans. I do not think mentioning them in the lead is due either. There is also no mention of "Land of Rus" in Encyclopedia of Ukraine, and really, we should be using better sources than this. If this is based on the image, then this looks like synth. The other changes do not look like an improvement. For example, what is "the first Rus' people" supposed to mean? Also, changing "Vladimir the Great and Yaroslav the Wise tried to associate the name with all of the extended princely domains" to "the name was as well denoting all of the Kievan domains" changes the meaning. Mellk (talk) 11:48, 26 October 2024 (UTC)

This is not a discussion done by me, and looks antinormanist, why should I care?

In the lead there's this quote "and took control of the city". What city of which region? I added specifications regarding this.

It is just called "Rus'" in Encyclopaedia. Source is fine. I guess you talk about the "names" section, in names section the name "Rus' land" is already introduced, it is literally another name for the same term. How is that "synth"?

"in 839, the Rus were Swedes; in 1043 the Rus were Slavs", that's what "first Rus' people" means, obviously, do you know anything about this topic or are you just testing my patience?

"changes the meaning" how? Shahray (talk) 12:09, 26 October 2024 (UTC)

You are clearly the same person as the IP. Otherwise, the same IP would not have asked me before why I reverted edits made by Shahray. Even if we pretend that I am stupid, the discussion is about similar changes, so yes, this is relevant.

Also, I have not seen the formulation "first Rus people" before. No one is arguing that they did not assimilate into the Slavic population, but this implies that there is a "second Rus people" and so on. Since you are resorting to personal attacks once again, I have lost interest in discussing. Mellk (talk) 13:07, 26 October 2024 (UTC)

I don't remember or care, this might be a common IP anyways.

I literally just inserted the quote from this article about this.

Please, how did I "personally attacked" you, and what "again" means? I just have no interest to wander in circles because of you giving some of the most minor excuses to not let my changes get in again and again.

I don't blame you, there are other editors which might be more knowledgeable about the topic and correct me in case I'm wrong. You're not the only one who can do that. Shahray (talk) 13:24, 26 October 2024 (UTC)

Let's address what you don't have concerns about. I don't see concerns about moving the tribes around Kiev upwards, so I guess it's safe for me restore this? Shahray (talk) 09:14, 27 October 2024 (UTC)

Add Kiyewskaya Rus as an alternate spelling

Ukraine, Russia, and Belarus are the three descendant nations and languages of the origjnal Kyivan Rus. So the Belarusian spelling should be there 2001:56A:E912:DB00:5441:1171:FB08:117D (talk) 00:26, 31 December 2024 (UTC)

We use the names commonly used in English-language sources. Alaexis_¿question? 09:19, 31 December 2024 (UTC)

• B-Class level-4 vital articles
• Misplaced Pages level-4 vital articles in History
• B-Class vital articles in History
• B-Class Rusyns articles
• Mid-importance Rusyns articles
• WikiProject Rusyns articles
• B-Class Belarus articles
• High-importance Belarus articles
• B-Class Ukraine articles
• Top-importance Ukraine articles
• WikiProject Ukraine articles
• B-Class Russia articles
• Top-importance Russia articles
• Top-importance B-Class Russia articles
• B-Class Russia (history) articles
• History of Russia task force articles
• B-Class Russia (human geography) articles
• Human geography of Russia task force articles
• WikiProject Russia articles
• B-Class former country articles
• WikiProject Former countries articles
• B-Class Middle Ages articles
• High-importance Middle Ages articles
• B-Class history articles
• All WikiProject Middle Ages pages
• Misplaced Pages pages referenced by the press