Ukraine the Yugo-Austria

[Danger-boy]

This is a map diagram of the history, borders and peoples of what is today the Ukrainian state.



The dark blue represents the historic Ukraine, the name given to this border region between Poland and Russia. In the 17th century, the name Ukraina, which literally means "Borderland," has been more or less secured by Poland for this dark blue geographic region. Russia came to call this region Malo-Rossia, or Little Russia.

The orange region, known today as Galicia and Volynia, remained under Polish and Austrian-Hungarian occupation for the longest time. Its inhabitants also called this regions Red Russia, as it is named on many ancient maps and referenced in Medieval manuscripts. The region, especially Galicia, developed its own version of Ukrainian language, with many foreign words introduced. It is mostly Catholic or Uniate, the result of centuries of Polish and Austrian pressure on local Orthodox population.

The medium blue Russia to the east already controlled the steppes around what later became Kharkov, Sumy, and eastern Donbass since 1503. When Poland carried out its ethnic-religious blitzkriegs against the Orthodox population in the dark blue region, the Orthodox refugees ran away and were accepted into Russian territory to settle and guard its borders. The refugees founded in Russia the fortresses of Kharkov, Sumy, and others and became loyal subjects of Moscow. That region came to be known as Slobodskaya Ukraina - not an ethnic name. Ukraina here means Russian borderland.

The light green region was the realm of the Zaporozhie Cossaks. It was very sparsely populated, except a few islands in the Dnepr river occupied by the cossaks. It had a complex history, which I will not discuss at this time. When the region came under Russian control the cossaks were disbanded for supporting Russian enemies, the Turks, the Swedes, or the Poles. Later in history the remains of Zaporozian cossaks submitted to the Russian crown willingly and became its loyal subjects. Meanwhile, the region underwent Russian colonization and settlement, with many new cities and fortresses.

The sky blue region was conquered by Russia from the Turks. I think it was Duke Potyomkin who gave the region its name Novo-Rossia. The Turks were completely destroyed, and whatever remaining settlements they had in the region they evacuated. The Crimea still had some Tatars in it. As with the light green region, Novo-Rossia was almost empty, and beginning with Tsar Peter the Great, it was gov't policy to settle the new regions to secure them under Moscow and St. Petersburg.
Settlers were brought in from deep inside Russia, including nobles (who were awarded land), peasants, cossaks, ukrainians, etc. Many were invited from other countries.



The resettlement of the region started with Serbian colonization of Russian borders at the time. The purple region of Serbian military colonies was set up by the Russian gov't to help Orthodox Serbs, persecuted by Austrians and Turks, immigrate to Russia and begin a new life.

Later on Novo-Rossia included the Serbian, Zaporozhian, and even Moldavian Bessarabia (light blue) regions. All of mostly unsettled Novo-Rossia was opened by the Russian gov't for foreigners and Russians alike to settle. Foreign settlers, such as Serbs, Bulgarians, Greeks, and Armenians, arrived from Orthodox Balkan and Caucusus lands under Turkish yoke and from German lands in various parts of Europe. Jews also migrated to the region, and from the mid-1800s, many West Europeans also settled there. One good example is John James Hughes, an English industialist, who came to the Donbass region to develop its coal-mining industry. He actually founded the metallurgical plant which later grew into the city of Yuzovka, named after him, renamed by the Soviets into Donetsk.



The map above comes from the published writings of Milyukov, a pre-Soviet liberal Russian historian, statesman, and politician - the same man who actually favored recognizing Ukrainian as a full language, rather than a Russian-Polish dialect. This rare map clearly illustrates how Novo-Rossia was colonized, which happened after it became part of Russia.

Outside of the dark blue region of historic Ukraine, no other region was ever called by that name or considered part of the Ukraine. Slobodskaya Ukraina was part of Russia even before this name was attached to it; the other regions conquered by Russia also did not have any Ukrainians living there. Russia colonized these regions and gave them the name of Novo-Rossia, which it proudly held for many years. In 1918, when Russia underwent several defeats and a civil war, its new rulers - mainly non-Russian revolutionaries - divided Russian lands into various republics and autonomous ethnic regions. Historically Russian Slobodskaya Ukrainia and Novo-Rossia were joined to very nationalistic Ukraine to become the Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic.

I believe anybody can draw the conclusion that modern Ukraine is a Yugoslavia-like federation but with a nationalistic Austria-Hungary like imperial attitude.

[big-daddy]

...In the 17th century, the name Ukraina, which literally means "Borderland,"...... Russia came to call this region Malo-Rossia, or Little Russia.

"Ukraina" as a word FIRST appeared in the Rus' texts. So what possible reason would someone have to call the center of the Rus' civilization a "borderland"? If anything I would call the backwoods of Moscow the borderland.
The name was popularized by Shevchenko only in the 19th century- he used a different word than the insulting malo-rosiya.

"Mala Rus' " first appeared to disignate the metropolitan(or some ecclesiastical seat like that) in Galicia, which was different from the rest of Rus' which was Ukraine. "Little Russia" to designate all Ukraine came to be used by Moscow ONLY after 17th and 18th century, after khmelnytsky came under the protection of the Moscow czar.

-it's 9 pm and i've got to go but i will respond to it all later.

[Danger-boy]

Originally posted by big-daddy
"Ukraina" as a word FIRST appeared in the Rus' texts. So what possible reason would someone have to call the center of the Rus' civilization a "borderland"? If anything I would call the backwoods of Moscow the borderland.

You think you can fool us?

Bad mistake.

Your ignorance only shows how stupid you and your fellow ukrainian nationalists are.

The word "ukraina" first appeared among the Slavs to designate a borderland centuries before the chronicles. The Russian chronicles mention it just as it was used in the oral tradition.

"Ukraina" does indeed appear in Kievan Rus chronicles two times. It refers only to a borderland between a couple of appenage Rus principalities and to a borderland in Belarussian provinces. That's all.
The word never referred to any country or people by that name. The land, people, and language were repeatedly called Rus and Russian.

If you want, compare Constantinople to Rome. When Rome declined, Constantinople rose from an obscure village into the center of civilization, christianity, art, trade, law, philosophy, invention, construction, etc. There is no comparison between Kiev, destroyed several times and conquered by Lithuania and annexed by Poland, and Moscow, which rose to dominate most of eastern Europe, and later St. Petersburg spanned three continents and dominated one fifth of the world.

And still, I wouldn't focus on just Moscow. The Russians have many cities and they moved their capital between Kiev, Vladimir, Moscow, St. Petersburg, etc. as they saw fit.
What do Ukrainian nationalists have? Lvov (Lemberg)? That's about it. They are fighting for Kiev because they don't have a chance in any other Ukrainian city, since Odessa, Donetsk, Kharkov, Dnepropetrovsk, etc. all speak Russian.

The name was popularized by Shevchenko only in the 19th century- he used a different word than the insulting malo-rosiya.
"Mala Rus' " first appeared to disignate the metropolitan(or some ecclesiastical seat like that) in Galicia, which was different from the rest of Rus' which was Ukraine. "Little Russia" to designate all Ukraine came to be used by Moscow ONLY after 17th and 18th century, after khmelnytsky came under the protection of the Moscow czar.

You should know that the people you call Ukrainians called themselves Russians or Little Russians from the time of Polish occupation to the 20th century. But nationalists like you got angry and decided they should call themselves a different name, and picked the word "borderland people."

There was nothing insulting. As even you probably know, "malaya" means the heart of the land, just as the metropolia (the capital city) is the small heartland, while its greater posessions are the colonies. That is how Russia saw Little Russia and Great Russia. Nobody was insulted. The true reason for choosing to be borderland people was to be against Russia. This automatically made the new Ukrainians allies to Poland, Sweden, Lithuania, Austria, Germany, America, Chechnya, etc.

On the other hand, a great number of people in the historic Ukraine supported Khmelnitsky and joined with Russia. There are still a great deal of people in Ukraine today who prefer to speak Russian and want close ties with Russia.

However, you miss the point of my post. It's about Novo-Rossia and historically Russian lands in eastern Ukraine.

[big-daddy]

Good account of people's movements and a mediocre one of history- mainly because it's from the Russian perspective.

... the Orthodox refugees ran away and were accepted into Russian territory to settle and guard its borders. The refugees founded in Russia the fortresses of Kharkov, Sumy, and others and became loyal subjects of Moscow...
The territory that they settled was as much Russian as it was Mongol, Khazar, Huns or Scythian.

... When the region came under Russian control the cossaks were disbanded for supporting Russian enemies, the Turks, the Swedes, or the Poles...
"disbanded" is a rather soft word, i would prefer massacred and deported. Peter massacred Baturyn, the capital, and hell knows how many cossacks died building the channels in the north and in construction of St. Petersburg.

...Zaporozian cossaks submitted to the Russian crown willingly and became its loyal subjects...
History lesson:
During the period of the Ruin (1650s-1680s) Muscovy incessantly played one cossack fraction against the other- Hetmanate, with a more organized state structure vs. the Zaporozhian Sich, the "wild" and democratic loose brotherhood. Sich hetman who were not loyal to Muscovy, like Polubotok for example, were tortured and killed. "Loyal"???? - like Mazepa?

...Meanwhile, the region underwent Russian colonization and settlement, with many new cities and fortresses.
Unwelcomed.
Strange similarities to modern day Israel with Jewish settlements in the sea of Palestinians--- very stabilizing!

...Settlers were brought in from deep inside Russia, including nobles (who were awarded land)
Again, unwelcomed.

...Foreign settlers, such as Serbs, Bulgarians, Greeks, and Armenians, arrived from Orthodox Balkan and Caucusus lands under Turkish yoke and from German lands in various parts of Europe. Jews also migrated to the region, and from the mid-1800s, many West Europeans also settled there...

You seem to suggest that a vast majority of the steppe region was non-Ukrainian, which is false. Up till the 1920s the cities were not Ukrainian, but the all the villages were.
The ethnicities that moved in are long gone, and it is not a multiethnic Yugoslavia-like orgy that you portray. Right now it is Russian and Ukrainian. Yugoslavia??? Thats hilarious

...Ukraine is a Yugoslavia-like federation but with a nationalistic Austria-Hungary like imperial attitude.
Am I wrong or is this too obvious? RUSSIA is the largest emperialist and probably the biggest agressor of all times. Refer to Alex-Ivanov for the proverb about the cow.

Here's the biggest problem with your Russian views presented here:
It is the CURRENT POPULATION which decides where the region belongs, NOT the past historical boundaries (although it is a good indicator). The current population is mostly Ukrainian (except Crimea).
My take on the devided map of Ukraine- given a fair election and making it obvious to the Ukrainian population in the Southern and Eastern regions that a vote for Yanukovich could mean separation from Ukraine, some of those oblasts, if not all, will turn orange.
Since you Russians like maps of devided Ukraine so much. how about his one:

[big-daddy]

... The Russian chronicle...
Next time you say "Russian" to designate anything of the Kievska Rus, I will ***** slap your arse. The correct word is "rus'ky" which has nothing to do with Peter changing the "Muscovite state" to "Rossiya" and "Russian". What Muscovy did is take the name of the ancient Rus' and claim it for your own.

...The land, people, and language were repeatedly called Rus and Russian...
There it is again. The people called themselves 'rusyny'.

...The Russians have many cities and they moved their capital between Kiev, Vladimir, Moscow, St. Petersburg, etc.

Kyyiv- Russia never had a capital there, Rus' did
Vladimir- that's when Muscow was still 'aul'. And yes to be more precise I would have to say it's the Vladimir-Suzdal principality from which Muscovy arose.

That is how Russia saw Little Russia and Great Russia. Nobody was insulted.
The unfortunate term is insulting, so is the "little brother".

On the other hand, a great number of people in the historic Ukraine supported Khmelnitsky and joined with Russia.
Or were shipped to Siberia if they refused to.

There are still a great deal of people in Ukraine today who prefer to speak Russian and want close ties with Russia.
"Preference" is irrelevant- it does not mean that they are Russians. Ukrainians comprise 75% of the population in the 2001 census, russians-18%. Some would say kick them all out, but I'm not that mean. And don't worry, Yu's Ukraine will have close ties with Russia, but not as close as it should be.



[Edited by Voyager13b on 13th December 2004 at 05:33]

[prawda__]

http://g.faculty.umkc.edu/gusako/sumy/sumy.html
sumy history

http://kharkov.vbelous.net/english/kharborn.htm
kharkov history


both ukraine citys founded by ukes and cossacks(ukes,poles,russians etc) taken from poland-lithuania commonwealth in 1503.....

last word wanna go back too 1500 or 1600 borders they gonna lose lot off siberia and eastern finland, tataria etc...make ure mind up....russia took thoose lands since 1991 it went bach to ukraine thats life...

ukraine,belarus, kaliningrad will join eu sooner or later...

[big-daddy]

... What do Ukrainian nationalists have? Lvov (Lemberg)? That's about it. They are fighting for Kiev because they don't have a chance in any other Ukrainian city, since Odessa, Donetsk, Kharkov, Dnepropetrovsk, etc. all speak Russian.

Yu. is not fighting for Kyyiv, he already won the city with 70%
And given free elections with equal media coverage the rest just might change.
"Nationalists" happen to support Yu. It's similar to how every old crooked communist supports Ya.-- this does not make Ya. a communist.
Yu. himself is from the Sumska oblast(East) and there couldn't be 15 mil 'nationalists' that have voted for him in the 2nd round. So obviously, others besides the evil nationalists voted for him.

P.S. There's nothing wrong with being a nationalist- If loving your country is wrong, then i don't want to be right.
Please don't make comparisons to the Nazis since these were ultra-nationalist xenophobes. "Nationalist" in Ukrainian sense is anyone who is patriotic to Ukraine, and being under Russian totalaristic hegemony it's an admirable trait.
Ya. and his russian posse, like in this forum, can 'vishaty' all the "lapsha" they want about Yu,. being a nationalist, a nazi, a fascist, the boogey man, Lucifer or anti-Christ.