OrthodoxChristianity.net
July 30, 2014, 04:05:40 PM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
News: Reminder: No political discussions in the public fora.  If you do not have access to the private Politics Forum, please send a PM to Fr. George.
 
   Home   Help Calendar Contact Treasury Tags Login Register  
Pages: 1   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: Russia-Rus/Ruthenia distinction  (Read 2715 times) Average Rating: 0
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
mike
Stratopedarches
**************
Offline Offline

Posts: 21,467


WWW
« on: September 29, 2009, 06:08:33 AM »

Does English do not see any distinction between Russia (state) and Rus/Ruthenia (are settled by Eastern Slavs)? Why Patriarch Cyrill's title is: Patriarch of Moscow and all Russia not Patriarch of Moscow and all Rus/Ruthenia?

Oops, it should be in Practise English board, I'm sorry.
« Last Edit: September 29, 2009, 06:16:01 AM by mike » Logged

Byzantinism
no longer posting here
Heorhij
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: GOA, for now, but my heart belongs to the Ukrainian Orthodox Church
Posts: 8,576



WWW
« Reply #1 on: September 29, 2009, 08:14:49 AM »

Does English do not see any distinction between Russia (state) and Rus/Ruthenia (are settled by Eastern Slavs)? Why Patriarch Cyrill's title is: Patriarch of Moscow and all Russia not Patriarch of Moscow and all Rus/Ruthenia?
Because of the deliberate falcification of history done in the late 15th century Muscovy. When Constantinople fell to the Turks, Muscovites jumped on the banwagon of the idea of becoming the "Third Rome." To that end, the rulers of the Great Principality of Muscovy ("Velikoe Knyazhestvo Moskovsoye") sponsored a campaign of a colossal scale, eliminating all authentic culture of the Muscovy lands(which was, essentially, non-Slavic, Ugro-Finnish), and creating the impression that the Muscovites are direct heirs of Kyiv Rus. This way, they could defend the thesis that they have continuously been a powerful, renowned, respectable Christian state since 988. In the early 18th century, they coined an artificial toponym "Rossiya," which was supposed to refer to all lands that the Great Princes of Muscovy put under their rule, from the Dnipro river in the West to Chukotka in the East. Most unfortunately, this toponym is being, to this day, translated into English as "Russia," giving the false impression that it includes the root "Rus."
Logged

Love never fails.
mike
Stratopedarches
**************
Offline Offline

Posts: 21,467


WWW
« Reply #2 on: September 29, 2009, 08:17:37 AM »

So the English/Americans simply do not see the difference?
Logged

Byzantinism
no longer posting here
HandmaidenofGod
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Ukrainian Orthodox Church of the USA (Ecumenical Patriarch)
Posts: 3,378


O Holy St. Demetrius pray to God for us!


« Reply #3 on: September 29, 2009, 08:38:28 AM »

No, and the history of Russia (and all of Eastern Europe for that matter) in most American grammer schools and high schools is limited to 1917 to present. Even when it is taught, it is often skewed and incorrect.

Example: I remember in 1992 when I was in 7th grade getting into an arguement with my Social Studies teacher who was Ukrainian Catholic, as she was trying to tell me that there was no such thing as Orthodoxy in Ukraine, and that anyone who was Orthodox lived in Russia, and that they were all atheists now. When I told her she was wrong, and that the majority of Ukrainians were Orthodox, she told me that information was false, and that I was lying. Angry

Needless to say, this did not go over well with me.
Logged

"For I know the thoughts that I think toward you, says the LORD, thoughts of peace and not of evil, to give you a future and a hope." Jer 29:11
Νεκτάριος
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Posts: 5,437



« Reply #4 on: September 29, 2009, 10:03:19 AM »

So the English/Americans simply do not see the difference?

I honestly don't know if many Americans could place Russia on a map, much less distinguish between Россия and Русь.
Logged
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,124



« Reply #5 on: September 29, 2009, 10:32:18 AM »

My first, when I was 16, was a Ukrainian (but of the same communion as Handmaiden's teacher.  I was Evangelical Lutheran at the time).  I knew nothing of Ukraine (in those days, "the Ukraine").  When I got a Ukrainian grammar, it had a picture of St. Volodymyr/Vladimir and I told her, "oh, early Russia."  One time she switched to Ukrainian to speak with a Polish customer, and the Pole said "Oh, a Russian girl." She just laughed.

At the millenium celebrations in 1988, it was styled here in Chicago and the rest of the US "the Baptism of Rus'".

Btw, in America, you are lucky if they can identify Russia on a map. It's only the largest country on the map. Roll Eyes

To be fair, most Ukrainians can't bring themselves to make the Ukrainian-Ruthenian/Rusyn/Carpatho-Russian distinction.  And some, like the Americans, can't make a distinction between Soviet and Russian.

Third Rome is falsification of history only if you also agree that Constantinople wasn't New Rome (a problem, as you have to explain away how the Roman emperor lived there, moved the senate there, and codified Roman law, in Latin, there). The distance between Rome and Constantinople is nearly three times the distance between Kiev and Moscow, who lie more directly next to each other (no mountains and seas in the way).  The Czar (the title had been used fitfully in the Vladimir-Suzdal-Moscow principality long before the fall of Constantinople) in Moscow was himself descended directly from the ruling house of Kiev (which came from Novgorod, Russia) and ruling houses of Constantinople, and married the heiress of the last Caesar at New Rome (such succession was common there).  Muscovoy was as Finno-Uralic as what is now Ukraine was Turkic (Pecheneg, Cumin, Khazar, Cumin, etc.).  And since the Ruling House of Kiev (and Moscow, and for that matter Polotsk) was Scandinavian in origin, I'm not sure the relevance.  We've discussed this before:
Quote
The thing is, the ethnonym "Rus" was used appropriated from your ancestors from mine (the Swedish ones, actually their cousins): here is the original "Rus"

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/9/9d/FC-Uppland%2C_Sweden.png

Roslagen refers to the coastal areas here of Svealand, the core of Sweden (he is the King of the Swedes/Svea, Goths (that's my ancestors) and Vandals).  Roden means to row and the districts each had to provide and man a ship for the king.  From there expeditions were launched across the Baltic, so the name gave rise to the Finnish and Estonian terms for Swedes:Ruotsi and Rootsi (both Finland and Estonia being under Sweden before under Russia).  From the Baltic they spread down to the Black Sea.  

Their polity got its start in Novgorod, Russia, Slavic and Finnic tribes inviting Rurik .  It then spread to the South with its dynasty, the Rurikids, who later conquered and then founded Kiev as the seat of their chief prince (kn'az, from the same Germanic root kuningaz which becomes king in English), Helgi (Slavic Oleg) moving his capital from Novgorod to Kiev.  The Rota system keep rotating the princes among the city states, so the Grand Princes of Kiev (like Vladimir and Yaroslav) ruled Russian cities first.
(the original is on the politics forum)
Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,124



« Reply #6 on: September 29, 2009, 10:33:07 AM »

So the English/Americans simply do not see the difference?

I honestly don't know if many Americans could place Russia on a map, much less distinguish between Россия and Русь.

^I was just thinking that. Spooky.
Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
Liz
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: Church of England
Posts: 989



« Reply #7 on: September 29, 2009, 05:44:32 PM »

I thought the Patriarch was Patriarch of Moscow 'and all the Russias'? It's plural, isn't it? Ie., referring not only to Russia (the modern state), but also to all the Rus nations?

Edit: sorry, I am really ignorant about this, but want to learn.
« Last Edit: September 29, 2009, 05:47:13 PM by Liz » Logged
Heorhij
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: GOA, for now, but my heart belongs to the Ukrainian Orthodox Church
Posts: 8,576



WWW
« Reply #8 on: September 29, 2009, 06:30:44 PM »

Liz, on the official Web page of the Moschow Patriarchy, http://www.mospat.ru/, Patriarch Kirill is called "The Patriarch of Moscow and All Rus'" ("Patriarkh Moskovskij i Vseya Rusi"). This is, of course, absurd, because historically Rus' has been the territory of the Great Principality of Kyiv (Kiev), i.e. modern Ukraine, Belarus, and small part of southwestern Russia. Lands of Vladimir-upon-Klyaz'ma, Suzdal' and Novgorod, and later Moscow, were not Rus', because there are numerous lines in chronicles where this or that prince, who was the ruler of these lands (northeast of the borders of the Great Principality of Kyiv) is said to "go to war against Rus'," etc. The present day state of "Rossiya" (most unfortunately, WRONGLY translated into English as "Russia") has nothing to do with Rus'. Actually, the prelate of the Kyiv Patriarchy, Filaret, albeit a non-canonical hierarch, has historically a lot more rights to call himself the Patriarch of all Rus'. It really is his (Filaret's) official title, "The Patriarch of Kyiv and all Ukraine-Rus'."
Logged

Love never fails.
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,124



« Reply #9 on: September 29, 2009, 08:06:08 PM »

Liz, on the official Web page of the Moschow Patriarchy, http://www.mospat.ru/, Patriarch Kirill is called "The Patriarch of Moscow and All Rus'" ("Patriarkh Moskovskij i Vseya Rusi"). This is, of course, absurd, because historically Rus' has been the territory of the Great Principality of Kyiv (Kiev), i.e. modern Ukraine, Belarus, and small part of southwestern Russia. Lands of Vladimir-upon-Klyaz'ma, Suzdal' and Novgorod, and later Moscow, were not Rus', because there are numerous lines in chronicles where this or that prince, who was the ruler of these lands (northeast of the borders of the Great Principality of Kyiv) is said to "go to war against Rus'," etc. The present day state of "Rossiya" (most unfortunately, WRONGLY translated into English as "Russia") has nothing to do with Rus'. Actually, the prelate of the Kyiv Patriarchy, Filaret, albeit a non-canonical hierarch, has historically a lot more rights to call himself the Patriarch of all Rus'. It really is his (Filaret's) official title, "The Patriarch of Kyiv and all Ukraine-Rus'."

Seems to be on the map here:
Quote

The Primary Chronicle makes it quite clear that Rurik founded the state in Novgorod, and his men Askold and  Dir liberated Kiev from the Turkic Khazars, on their way to Constantinople.

When the capital of the US was moved from Philadelphia to Washington, the country didn't cease to exist.  When Illinois' capital of Kaskaskia moved to Springfield (via Vandalia) the state didn't cease to exist (even when Kaskaskia fell into the Mississippi).  The distance may be less than Kiev to Moscow (but only a little less: Kaskaskia to Chicago is nearly the same for Kiev to Moscow), but that still doesn't put Moscow any further out of the pale any more than Springfield wasn't part of Illinois when Kaskaskia was capital.

I'd have to see the quote from the chronicles to evaluate what you are alleging.


Being uncanonical Met. Filaret has NO right to call himself the patriarch of the Rus.  And Rossiya has everythig to do with the Rus'.
Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
Heorhij
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: GOA, for now, but my heart belongs to the Ukrainian Orthodox Church
Posts: 8,576



WWW
« Reply #10 on: September 29, 2009, 10:19:49 PM »

The page about Rurik was GLUED INTO the Cronicle.
Logged

Love never fails.
Heorhij
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: GOA, for now, but my heart belongs to the Ukrainian Orthodox Church
Posts: 8,576



WWW
« Reply #11 on: September 29, 2009, 10:42:07 PM »

The Primary Chronicle makes it quite clear that Rurik founded the state in Novgorod, and his men Askold and  Dir liberated Kiev from the Turkic Khazars, on their way to Constantinople.

Isa, I did not expect this even from YOU. Askold and Dir were autochtons of Kyiv and Polyany (Slavs), who were killed by Oleg, a noble in the court of Rurik. How, by ANY Russofilic and quasi-"historian" stretch, could THEY, the two princes assassinated by a vassal of Rurik, be "men of Rurik?"

When the capital of the US was moved from Philadelphia to Washington, the country didn't cease to exist.  When Illinois' capital of Kaskaskia moved to Springfield (via Vandalia) the state didn't cease to exist (even when Kaskaskia fell into the Mississippi).  The distance may be less than Kiev to Moscow (but only a little less: Kaskaskia to Chicago is nearly the same for Kiev to Moscow), but that still doesn't put Moscow any further out of the pale any more than Springfield wasn't part of Illinois when Kaskaskia was capital.

And what in the world does this have to do with prices on whatever in China?

When Anna Yaroslavna, the daughter of Yaroslav the Wise, became the Queen of France, - did France became Rus'?

Similarly, when some Rusich prince became the prince of Suzdal' or another Ugro-Finnish land, - did it become Rus'?

Being uncanonical Met. Filaret has NO right to call himself the patriarch of the Rus.  And Rossiya has everythig to do with the Rus'.
Nothing...
« Last Edit: September 29, 2009, 10:44:26 PM by Heorhij » Logged

Love never fails.
Νεκτάριος
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Posts: 5,437



« Reply #12 on: September 30, 2009, 04:58:25 AM »

So the English/Americans simply do not see the difference?

I honestly don't know if many Americans could place Russia on a map, much less distinguish between Россия and Русь.

^I was just thinking that. Spooky.

In all fairness though, this is a pretty obscure topic and not in the day to day experience of most Americans, unless, of course, you can see Russian from your house. 

Logged
Tags:
Pages: 1   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.18 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!
Page created in 0.07 seconds with 40 queries.