Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Russia: Land of the Tsar

Expand Messages
  • Jeanne Papanastasiou
    May 26 & 27 http://www.historychannel.com/russia/ Russia. In the famous words of Winston Churchill, Russia is a riddle, wrapped in a mystery, inside an
    Message 1 of 29 , May 20, 2003
    • 0 Attachment
      May 26 & 27

      http://www.historychannel.com/russia/

      Russia. In the famous words of Winston Churchill, Russia is "a riddle,
      wrapped in a mystery, inside an enigma." Over the centuries, the country has
      retained that sense of mystery, and its history remains a riddle - one to
      which historians keep returning for answers.

      The History Channel presents the global premiere, RUSSIA: LAND OF THE TSARS,
      on Monday and Tuesday, May 26 and 27, at 9-11pm ET/8-10pm CT. The four-hour
      special delves into the fascinating history of Russia, in a lavish, sweeping
      documentary that explores Russian history from the beginning of an empire to
      its downfall.

      Interviews with top historians, vivid historical reenactments and stunning
      on-location filming bring the country's history and its larger-than-life
      leaders back into existence - from Prince Vladimir in the 10th century to
      Vladimir Ulyanov, or Lenin, at the dawn of the 20th. The immediacy, drama
      and power of these real-life stories and vital events of Russian history
      reveal why Russia has for so long held the world enthralled.

      Soffya Appollonia Tudja
      http://www.aeonline.biz/Links.htm
      Argent, a patriarchal cross between three crescent gules on a chief sable
      three fleur-de-lys Or
    • Laura Todd
      How interesting you should mention this. If I ever write a sequel to my Khazar novel (which is at the Agent s), it will feature Prince Vladimir. Can anyone
      Message 2 of 29 , May 21, 2003
      • 0 Attachment
        How interesting you should mention this. If I ever write a sequel to my
        Khazar novel (which is at the Agent's), it will feature Prince Vladimir. Can
        anyone recommend some good sources that are in English?

        Laura/Leya

        ======================
        The History Channel presents the global premiere, RUSSIA: LAND OF THE TSARS,
        on Monday and Tuesday, May 26 and 27, at 9-11pm ET/8-10pm CT. The four-hour
        special delves into the fascinating history of Russia, in a lavish, sweeping
        documentary that explores Russian history from the beginning of an empire to
        its downfall.

        Interviews with top historians, vivid historical reenactments and stunning
        on-location filming bring the country's history and its larger-than-life
        leaders back into existence - from Prince Vladimir in the 10th century to
        Vladimir Ulyanov, or Lenin, at the dawn of the 20th. The immediacy, drama
        and power of these real-life stories and vital events of Russian history
        reveal why Russia has for so long held the world enthralled.

        Soffya Appollonia Tudja
        http://www.aeonline.biz/Links.htm
        Argent, a patriarchal cross between three crescent gules on a chief sable
        three fleur-de-lys Or






        Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
      • Laura Todd
        Greetings, I am doing research on Prince Vladimir of Kiev. I am writing a sequel to my Khazar novel THE PROPHET QUEEN
        Message 3 of 29 , May 25, 2003
        • 0 Attachment
          Greetings,

          I am doing research on Prince Vladimir of Kiev. I am writing a sequel to my
          Khazar novel THE PROPHET QUEEN
          (http://www.geocities.com/shadow42.geo/fiction.html), and this sequel would
          include Prince Vladimir's famous conversion to Orthodox Christianity
          preceded by a conference of 4 faiths. I know that Vladimir was previously
          considered a lecher who molested young girls before he became a "saint". I
          am afraid that he appears as a villain in my plot, based on this
          predeliction. Oh, he also threw the statues of Perun into the river, which
          was probably not received well by people of that time, though later a
          saintly spin was put on his 'vanquishing the heathen gods'.

          My biggest concern is whether people today, especially in the Orthodox and
          Slavic communities, would get offended by my not too flatering portrayal. Do
          people view him as a saint who changed his ways? Wouldn't want to get anyone
          angry... :-}

          Laura/Leya


          -----Original Message-----
          From: Jeanne Papanastasiou [mailto:jeanne@...]


          Interviews with top historians, vivid historical reenactments and stunning
          on-location filming bring the country's history and its larger-than-life
          leaders back into existence - from Prince Vladimir in the 10th century Vl
        • Paul W. Goldschmidt
          ... I am not Orthodox, but I remember once being corrected by an Orthodox nun for my assumption that Orthodox saints were as pure as Catholic ones. She
          Message 4 of 29 , May 25, 2003
          • 0 Attachment
            At 12:19 PM 5/25/2003 -0400, you wrote:
            >My biggest concern is whether people today, especially in the Orthodox and
            >Slavic communities, would get offended by my not too flatering portrayal. Do
            >people view him as a saint who changed his ways? Wouldn't want to get anyone
            >angry... :-}

            I am not Orthodox, but I remember once being corrected by an Orthodox nun
            for my assumption that Orthodox saints were as "pure" as Catholic
            ones. She pointed out to me that in Orthodoxy, Saint are not venerated as
            completely pure beings. They start out as sinners and are converted and
            accept God. In fact the purpose of a Lives of the Saints, she said, was to
            show the laity how impure these people in fact started out as.

            Thus, the reason we know so much about the seedy side of Vladimir's life is
            precisely because the Orthodox Church wanted us to know those parts of his
            life.

            With a few notable exceptions (Saint Augustine, for example), it is a
            Catholic thing to want to white wash those early life tales.

            I'm sure an Orthodox believer will speak more accurately about this, but I
            remember being quite struck by the contrast.

            -- Paul
          • MHoll@aol.com
            In a message dated 5/25/2003 11:20:16 AM Central Daylight Time, ... Not exactly. Just someone with a prodigious sexual drive. But young girl (child) by
            Message 5 of 29 , May 25, 2003
            • 0 Attachment
              In a message dated 5/25/2003 11:20:16 AM Central Daylight Time,
              shadow42@... writes:

              > I know that Vladimir was previously
              > considered a lecher who molested young girls before he became a "saint".

              Not exactly. Just someone with a prodigious sexual drive. But "young girl"
              (child) by period standards would have to be pre-pubescent. A 14-year-old is a
              marriageable young lady. Basically, and adult. I've never read/heard of
              Vladimir being interested in children.


              > Do people view him as a saint who changed his ways? Wouldn't want to get
              > anyone angry... :-}

              You will get people angry and upset anyway. By definition. Goes with the
              game. But As Paul said, Orthodox saints, quite often, are great sinners who repent
              and amend their ways. My favorite is Olga (Vladimir's grandmother) and her
              revenge, pre-conversion. Very pagan, and very bloody. And it's part of her vita.

              <A HREF="http://members.aol.com/Predslava/RussianHistoryTriviaPage.html#Revenge">Olga's Revenge</A>
              (http://members.aol.com/Predslava/RussianHistoryTriviaPage.html#Revenge)

              Predslava


              [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
            • Kinjal of Moravia
              ... Orthodox and ... portrayal. Do ... get anyone ... Don t worry about it - somebody will get angry no matter what you do -- others will become inspired.
              Message 6 of 29 , May 25, 2003
              • 0 Attachment
                --- In sig@yahoogroups.com, "Laura Todd" <shadow42@e...> wrote:
                > Greetings,
                >
                >> My biggest concern is whether people today, especially in the
                Orthodox and
                > Slavic communities, would get offended by my not too flatering
                portrayal. Do
                > people view him as a saint who changed his ways? Wouldn't want to
                get anyone
                > angry... :-}

                Don't worry about it - somebody will get angry no matter what you
                do -- others will become inspired. Even within the Catholic Church
                you can see a greater shift to 'reality' than posturing, even to
                throwing out myths like 'Saint Christopher'. I have been amazed at
                he change in the last 10 years, even to hear Jesuits speak openly of
                deceits and false PR. Look at the activities of medieval Popes and
                Bishops. Your Saint has nothing to be embarrased about. Yes, there
                are many theological scholars who feel that the shift from sin
                produced the best saints. Look at Saint Paul. One key thought
                though -- it is hard to accept any of the writings and stories about
                early saints as accurate, except those that kept journals and wrote
                a lot of letters.

                Kinjal

                Kinjal
                >
                > >
                >
                > -----Original Message-----
                > From: Jeanne Papanastasiou [mailto:jeanne@a...]
                >
                >
                > Interviews with top historians, vivid historical reenactments and
                stunning
                > on-location filming bring the country's history and its larger-
                than-life
                > leaders back into existence - from Prince Vladimir in the 10th
                century Vl
              • douglas petroff
                But As Paul said, Orthodox saints, quite often, are great sinners who repent and amend their ways I m not so sure about that. Alexander Nevsky appears to be
                Message 7 of 29 , May 25, 2003
                • 0 Attachment
                  "But As Paul said, Orthodox saints, quite often, are great sinners who repent
                  and amend their ways" I'm not so sure about that. Alexander Nevsky appears to be one of those sainted because God smiled on him with the "miraculous" breaking of the ice. Not bad for a man who spent most of his life running to Sarai to keep the Mongol's happy. (or so the story goes) Sergius B

                  [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                • Alexey Kiyaikin
                  Greetings Laura! Sunday, May 25, 2003, 8:19:01 PM, you wrote: Actually, the Russian concept of a saint is connected with a Deed rather than Being so-and-so.
                  Message 8 of 29 , May 25, 2003
                  • 0 Attachment
                    Greetings Laura!

                    Sunday, May 25, 2003, 8:19:01 PM, you wrote:


                    Actually, the Russian concept of a saint is connected with a Deed
                    rather than Being so-and-so. And no one in Russia is offended by shere
                    knowing Vladimir had a harem down there in Kiev, that Russia was
                    baptized shedding streams of blood, that he was called "slave-son" and
                    baptized Russia because needed a solid ideological base for being the
                    ruler (being a slave-son indeed). It's a common knowledge that is a
                    background for ANY attitude to him in this country.

                    LT> My biggest concern is whether people today, especially in the Orthodox and
                    LT> Slavic communities, would get offended by my not too flatering portrayal. Do
                    LT> people view him as a saint who changed his ways? Wouldn't want to get anyone
                    Not in the least. The changes started rather late. Actually, his
                    figure was appraised already in the 14 century bylinas, being
                    contaminated with Vladimir Monomach.
                    LT> angry... :-}




                    --
                    Bye,
                    Alex mailto:Posadnik@...
                  • MHoll@aol.com
                    In a message dated 5/26/2003 12:01:07 AM Central Daylight Time, ... Vita notwithstanding, that s not really how the Russians generally perceive it: not as a
                    Message 9 of 29 , May 26, 2003
                    • 0 Attachment
                      In a message dated 5/26/2003 12:01:07 AM Central Daylight Time,
                      sergius@... writes:

                      > I'm not so sure about that. Alexander Nevsky appears to be one of those
                      > sainted because God smiled on him with the "miraculous" breaking of the ice.

                      Vita notwithstanding, that's not really how the Russians generally perceive
                      it: not as a miracle, but as a testimony to Alexander's cunning. If anything,
                      it's his ability to understand nature and its dangers and make use of them that
                      helped the victory at Peipus/Chudskoe, but mostly, it's his ability as a
                      tactician.


                      > Not bad for a man who spent most of his life running to Sarai to keep the
                      > Mongol's happy. (or so the story goes)

                      As far as the vita goes, that would fall under "blessed are the peacemakers"
                      -- the perception being that he sacrificed his personal pride to maintain
                      peace when no military victory was possible, and gave Russia time to rebuild.

                      And it's not "all saints were sinners first," but "many saints were sinners
                      first."

                      Predslava.


                      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                    • Laura Todd
                      ... From: Kinjal of Moravia [mailto:gusarimagic@rinternet.com] Sent: Sunday, May 25, 2003 5:05 PM To: sig@yahoogroups.com Subject: [sig] Re: Prince Vladimir
                      Message 10 of 29 , May 26, 2003
                      • 0 Attachment
                        -----Original Message-----
                        From: Kinjal of Moravia [mailto:gusarimagic@...]
                        Sent: Sunday, May 25, 2003 5:05 PM
                        To: sig@yahoogroups.com
                        Subject: [sig] Re: Prince Vladimir


                        --- In sig@yahoogroups.com, "Laura Todd" <shadow42@e...> wrote:
                        > Greetings,
                        >
                        >> My biggest concern is whether people today, especially in the
                        Orthodox and
                        > Slavic communities, would get offended by my not too flatering
                        portrayal. Do
                        > people view him as a saint who changed his ways? Wouldn't want to
                        get anyone
                        > angry... :-}

                        >Don't worry about it - somebody will get angry no matter what you
                        do -- others will become inspired.

                        Yes, I suppose one has to keep that in mind .
                        But issues like this are probably why there are so many novels about
                        imaginary versions of European history. Much easier than real history!

                        >produced the best saints. Look at Saint Paul. One key thought
                        though -- it is hard to accept any of the writings and stories about
                        early saints as accurate, except those that kept journals and wrote
                        a lot of letters.

                        I have seen some fiction about various biblical characters, some of it
                        'reverent' and some quite the opposite. For instance writers seem to like to
                        take the 'halo' off King David. Personally I think this is acceptable. Also
                        I read a novel 'Jericho Road" by Matthew Woodring Stover, which was from the
                        point of view of an Irish mercenary who helped the Jebusites defend against
                        the Israelites, who were the 'bad guys", with Jehovah being the biggest
                        villain of all. I was impressed by the audacity of this concept and wondered
                        if any evangelicals or Orthodox Jews were picketing this writer's house.

                        Which is getting a bit off-topic, but touches on the question of writing
                        historical fiction and knocking a few heroes off pedestals. Ouch.

                        Laura/Leya

                        Kinjal

                        Kinjal
                        >
                        > >
                        >
                        > -----Original Message-----
                        > From: Jeanne Papanastasiou [mailto:jeanne@a...]
                        >
                        >
                        > Interviews with top historians, vivid historical reenactments and
                        stunning
                        > on-location filming bring the country's history and its larger-
                        than-life
                        > leaders back into existence - from Prince Vladimir in the 10th
                        century Vl





                        Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
                      • Alex Grant [T]
                        Laura, If you re writing fiction why not rename your hero to Vladislav or Slavomir. If you plan to only portray the historical character s partial attributes.
                        Message 11 of 29 , May 26, 2003
                        • 0 Attachment
                          Laura,

                          If you're writing fiction why not rename your hero to Vladislav or Slavomir.
                          If you plan to only portray the historical character's partial attributes.
                          This would not sound as offensive, and you would not have to be concerned.

                          > >> My biggest concern is whether people today, especially in the
                          > Orthodox and Slavic communities, would get offended by my not too
                          flatering
                          > portrayal. Do people view him as a saint who changed his ways? Wouldn't
                          want to
                          > get anyone angry... :-}

                          This is my concern also. But the West has always ridiculed Russian rulers
                          for their bad deeds, never mentioning their good achievements. What else is
                          new?

                          >>Thus, the reason we know so much about the seedy side of Vladimir's life
                          is
                          precisely because the Orthodox Church wanted us to know those parts of his
                          life.

                          It's true that the transition from sinful life to repentance and holiness is
                          a great deed, as is shown in Prince Vladimir, Apostle Paul, St. Mary of
                          Egypt and the repentent thief on the cross, not everything in the Russian
                          Chronicles is completely undeniable. Chronicle writers of the court and even
                          compilers of lives of saints may have exaggerated some things to make it
                          appear precisely that way. The Russian Chronicles also did not favor certain
                          princes without citing specific examples of their wrongdoings. Bearing this
                          in mind we should not lose focus of Vladimir's crown achievement of his
                          life - the Baptism of Russia (and himself), which is what made him famous
                          and made him the celebrity in the Russian Chronicles. His pagan life was
                          similar to that of any other pagan prince or lord of his time, and I really
                          don't see any reason to single Vladimir's life style as outstanding from the
                          custom of the day. But then again, why Vladimir?


                          > Don't worry about it - somebody will get angry no matter what you
                          > do -- others will become inspired. Even within the Catholic Church
                          > you can see a greater shift to 'reality' than posturing, even to
                          > throwing out myths like 'Saint Christopher'. I have been amazed at
                          > he change in the last 10 years, even to hear Jesuits speak openly of
                          > deceits and false PR. Look at the activities of medieval Popes and
                          > Bishops. Your Saint has nothing to be embarrased about. ...

                          The "greater shift to 'reality'" by the Catholic Church is not an example (I
                          am not even sure what that means). The Roman and Orthodox Churches are not
                          comparable -- their histories and realities are very different. To the
                          Orthodox, St. Chistopher is very much a real saint.

                          The problem is if you portray Prince Vladimir you should mention his
                          transition to good, otherwise it's just not good fiction, not anywhere near
                          the great Bulgakov or Sienkievich. I can add many other details about
                          Vladimir's supposed life while prince of Novgorod and his travels which is
                          not well known.

                          B
                        • Alexey Kiyaikin
                          Greetings! Monday, May 26, 2003, 9:00:51 AM, you wrote: dp But As Paul said, Orthodox saints, quite often, are great sinners who repent dp and amend their
                          Message 12 of 29 , May 26, 2003
                          • 0 Attachment
                            Greetings!

                            Monday, May 26, 2003, 9:00:51 AM, you wrote:

                            dp> "But As Paul said, Orthodox saints, quite often, are great sinners who repent
                            dp> and amend their ways" I'm not so sure about that. Alexander Nevsky appears to be one of those sainted because God smiled on him with the "miraculous" breaking of the ice. Not bad for a man who
                            dp> spent most of his life running to Sarai to keep the Mongol's happy. (or so the story goes) Sergius B
                            Alexander Nevsky was sainted because of his victories (nowhere except
                            one chronicle does the episode with the drowning knights exist), but
                            remembered as a wise politician that put an end to greedy ambitions of
                            the teutonic knights & the Pope that proclaimed the north-eastwardly
                            crusade. He used the Mongols to fight the Teutons - a wise idea.



                            --
                            Bye,
                            Alex mailto:Posadnik@...
                          • Kresimir Zeravica
                            ... Which great deed did Paul do in his catharsys?!? Jesus appeared before him and spoke to him, he also blinded him completely for a week or so. Later on
                            Message 13 of 29 , May 27, 2003
                            • 0 Attachment
                              --- "Alex Grant [T]" <tower@...> wrote:
                              > It's true that the transition from sinful life to
                              > repentance and holiness is
                              > a great deed, as is shown in Prince Vladimir,
                              > Apostle Paul, St. Mary of
                              > Egypt and the repentent thief on the cross, not
                              > everything in the Russian
                              > Chronicles is completely undeniable.

                              Which great deed did Paul do in his catharsys?!? Jesus
                              appeared before him and spoke to him, he also blinded
                              him completely for a week or so. Later on another
                              saint came to testify to him and release him from the
                              blindness cause God has spoken to him in a dream.
                              After that paul is learning the doctrine and the "Way"
                              (as they called it then) for about two years before he
                              started his sainthood "carrer".
                              ---------

                              I think Paul is also stating that all christian
                              believers are saints not just a special few...the
                              degree of loyalty to God and God's work, shines in
                              their life in degrees prooving faithfulness or lack
                              there of.
                              ----------

                              I could quote you the Bible verses that are relevant
                              for those claims above but something tells me that is
                              not what you wish :)

                              __________________________________
                              Do you Yahoo!?
                              The New Yahoo! Search - Faster. Easier. Bingo.
                              http://search.yahoo.com
                            • Alex Grant [T]
                              ... I am not sure I follow. The issue was Prince Vladimir s transition to Christianity, not Paul s deeds, or lack therof. Paul also underwent a transition to
                              Message 14 of 29 , May 27, 2003
                              • 0 Attachment
                                > Which great deed did Paul do in his catharsys?!? Jesus
                                > appeared before him and spoke to him, he also blinded
                                > him completely for a week or so. Later on another
                                > saint came to testify to him and release him from the
                                > blindness cause God has spoken to him in a dream.
                                > After that paul is learning the doctrine and the "Way"
                                > (as they called it then) for about two years before he
                                > started his sainthood "carrer".

                                I am not sure I follow. The issue was Prince Vladimir's transition to
                                Christianity, not Paul's "deeds," or lack therof.
                                Paul also underwent a transition to Christianity, which is the parallel, if
                                I may call it that, with the life of Vladimir.

                                Hope this clarifies.

                                Alex
                              • Laura Todd
                                ... From: Alex Grant [T] [mailto:tower@axs.net] Sent: Tuesday, May 27, 2003 12:04 AM To: sig@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [sig] Re: Prince Vladimir Laura, ...
                                Message 15 of 29 , May 27, 2003
                                • 0 Attachment
                                  -----Original Message-----
                                  From: Alex Grant [T] [mailto:tower@...]
                                  Sent: Tuesday, May 27, 2003 12:04 AM
                                  To: sig@yahoogroups.com
                                  Subject: Re: [sig] Re: Prince Vladimir


                                  Laura,

                                  >If you're writing fiction why not rename your hero to Vladislav or
                                  Slavomir.
                                  If you plan to only portray the historical character's partial attributes.
                                  This would not sound as offensive, and you would not have to be concerned.

                                  >and made him the celebrity in the Russian Chronicles. His pagan life was
                                  similar to that of any other pagan prince or lord of his time, and I really
                                  don't see any reason to single Vladimir's life style as outstanding from the
                                  custom of the day. But then again, why Vladimir?

                                  Because I am writing about the last days of the Khazars, and they would have
                                  viewed Vladimir as an antagonist & maybe an enemy. (Vladimir's father
                                  Sviatoslav had just recently completed a conquest of Khazaria in the year
                                  965.) Shortly after Vladimir's conversion, Russia & the Byzantines went up
                                  against Khazaria for the final time. This is going to be part of my story,
                                  yet I am unable to find any details on it, like which prince was involved
                                  and why the Rus & Byzantines teamed up against the Khazar king Georgius
                                  Tzul.

                                  There are few facts about anything in this period, which is why I have to
                                  fill in the blanks with a lot of invention, fictional interaction of
                                  characters etc. I put a bit of magic/fantasy in too. I can fudge the years a
                                  bit and invent characters, but I don't think I could fudge something as big
                                  as the name of a real historical figure.

                                  >princes without citing specific examples of their wrongdoings. Bearing this
                                  in mind we should not lose focus of Vladimir's crown achievement of his
                                  life - the Baptism of Russia (and himself), which is what made him famous

                                  I have read some accounts that hint that this conversion may have been a
                                  political move to ally Russia with the biggest power in the area, i.e.
                                  Byzantium.

                                  >The problem is if you portray Prince Vladimir you should mention his
                                  transition to good, otherwise it's just not good fiction, not anywhere near
                                  the great Bulgakov or Sienkievich.

                                  No, I make no claim to be writing Great Fiction here! :)

                                  > I can add many other details about
                                  Vladimir's supposed life while prince of Novgorod and his travels which is
                                  not well known.

                                  As I said, this is not really a life story of Vladimir. But whatever details
                                  you have, I'll copy into my notes. I have barely started researching this
                                  project.

                                  Thanks,
                                  Laura
                                • K2356@aol.com
                                  Who were the Teutons ? He used the Mongols to fight the Teutons - a wise idea. kevin
                                  Message 16 of 29 , May 28, 2003
                                  • 0 Attachment
                                    Who were the Teutons ?


                                    He used the Mongols to fight the Teutons - a wise idea.

                                    kevin
                                  • Kresimir Zeravica
                                    ... Someone mentioned that to achieve sainthood one has to undergo a deed oor what not. But Paul as one of the Fathers of all Chrisyian denominations states
                                    Message 17 of 29 , May 28, 2003
                                    • 0 Attachment
                                      --- "Alex Grant [T]" <tower@...> wrote:
                                      > I am not sure I follow. The issue was Prince
                                      > Vladimir's transition to
                                      > Christianity, not Paul's "deeds," or lack therof.
                                      > Paul also underwent a transition to Christianity,
                                      > which is the parallel, if
                                      > I may call it that, with the life of Vladimir.
                                      >
                                      > Hope this clarifies.
                                      >
                                      > Alex

                                      Someone mentioned that to "achieve" sainthood one has
                                      to undergo a deed oor what not. But Paul as one of the
                                      Fathers of all Chrisyian denominations states that
                                      deeds have nothing to do with being a christian.
                                      Therefore the deed comment wasnt valid...I wished to
                                      notice that by my replyes.
                                      Sorry, I was digressing a bit from the theme of
                                      Vladimir (of whom I know nothing about), but I thought
                                      it important enough to put Pauls own words in
                                      correcting that someones doctrinal statements.

                                      __________________________________
                                      Do you Yahoo!?
                                      Yahoo! Calendar - Free online calendar with sync to Outlook(TM).
                                      http://calendar.yahoo.com
                                    • Kinjal of Moravia
                                      ... effectiveness during the Crusades where pretty crummpy when they came home. They had a blood oath that gave them claim to any land from a fallen brother
                                      Message 18 of 29 , May 28, 2003
                                      • 0 Attachment
                                        --- In sig@yahoogroups.com, K2356@a... wrote:
                                        > Who were the Teutons ?
                                        > He probably means the Teutonic Knights, who dispite their
                                        effectiveness during the Crusades where pretty crummpy when they
                                        came home. They had a blood oath that gave them claim to any land
                                        from a fallen brother knight and there was many bitter fights from
                                        surviving relatives. Yet their size and skill was essential against
                                        the Agars, and I guess the Mongols, though my research shows they
                                        refused to support wars against the Golden Horde -- not in their
                                        financial interest. They also refused to bath during their marches
                                        and it is said that their smell itself was a weapon.

                                        Kinjal
                                        >
                                        > He used the Mongols to fight the Teutons - a wise idea.
                                        >
                                        > kevin
                                      • jenne@fiedlerfamily.net
                                        ... Well, considering that they did most of their crusading in Eastern Europe against the Prus (the native Prus tribe was completely wiped out by their
                                        Message 19 of 29 , May 28, 2003
                                        • 0 Attachment
                                          > > He probably means the Teutonic Knights, who dispite their
                                          > effectiveness during the Crusades where pretty crummpy when they
                                          > came home.

                                          Well, considering that they did most of their 'crusading' in Eastern
                                          Europe against the Prus (the native Prus tribe was completely wiped out by
                                          their conquests), the Lithuanians, and sometimes their other neighbors
                                          such as the Poles and Bohemians, people weren't very happy to see them,
                                          generally, no.

                                          The Teutonic Knights first started in Palestine, and had headquarters
                                          there between 1190 and 1291.

                                          They started moving into Hungary in 1211 (fighting against the Cumans) but
                                          were expelled for excessive demands in 1225.

                                          They began the conquest of Prussia in 1233 and under the Golden Bull of
                                          Rimini, they were allowed to rule any lands they captured.

                                          They sustained a crushing defeat against the combined forces of Poland and
                                          Lithuania and their allies at Grunwald in 1410, and the order was
                                          dissolved in 1525.

                                          -- Pani Jadwiga Zajaczkowa, Knowledge Pika jenne@...
                                          "Our whole American way of life is a great war of ideas, and librarians
                                          are the arms dealers selling weapons to both sides." -- James Quinn
                                        • Alex Grant [T]
                                          Sorry, it wasn t me. It s considered good to repent - and that is what I called a good deed - but it does not necessarily qualify one for sainthood. I wouldn t
                                          Message 20 of 29 , May 28, 2003
                                          • 0 Attachment
                                            Sorry, it wasn't me.
                                            It's considered good to repent - and that is what I called a good deed - but
                                            it does not necessarily qualify one for sainthood. I wouldn't even discuss
                                            it here.

                                            [Huge clip by moderator. DO not quote entire previous posts in your messages]
                                          • Alex Grant [T]
                                            ... have ... Not sure they would. AFAIK, Svyatoslav destroyed the Khazar elite, who did not have a loyal army. Much of the Khazar army were mercenaries, who
                                            Message 21 of 29 , May 28, 2003
                                            • 0 Attachment
                                              > Because I am writing about the last days of the Khazars, and they would
                                              have
                                              > viewed Vladimir as an antagonist & maybe an enemy.

                                              Not sure they would. AFAIK, Svyatoslav destroyed the Khazar elite, who did
                                              not have a loyal army. Much of the Khazar army were mercenaries, who didn't
                                              have the will to defend their lords when the Russians arrived, and many of
                                              them just ran away. So the antagonists could be any one else, the deserted
                                              army, the allies who didn't come to help against the Russians, the rival
                                              steppe tribes, the Pechenegs (Patzinaks), the Polovtsi (Cumans), the Kasogi,
                                              or even the Magyars, not to mention whoever lived south of the Caucasus and
                                              east of the Caspian at the time. There were many local forces at large who
                                              didn't leave a written record of historic events in that region.
                                              Vladimir's foreign campaigns were primarily against the Volga Bulgars,
                                              Galicia-Volyn, and Byzantine ports in the Crimea.

                                              > There are few facts about anything in this period, which is why I have to
                                              > fill in the blanks with a lot of invention, fictional interaction of
                                              > characters etc. I put a bit of magic/fantasy in too. I can fudge the years
                                              a
                                              > bit and invent characters, but I don't think I could fudge something as
                                              big
                                              > as the name of a real historical figure.

                                              If there's going to be magic involved, I can't argue. But, I would still
                                              suggest looking into the Polovtsi and Pechenegs, who were Russia's main
                                              concern in the steppe, after Svyatoslav destroyed the Khazars in the steppe.
                                              The Byzantines may be a different story, since they had an alliance with
                                              Khazaria previously.

                                              Since, as you also admit, there are few facts about that period, it may be
                                              very likely that the steppe tribes settled those issues with the Causasus
                                              tribes on their own, without much Russian or Byzantine involvement. And
                                              since that area did not produce much evidence in writing would suggest that
                                              whatever existed was destroyed in the process.

                                              > I have read some accounts that hint that this conversion may have been a
                                              > political move to ally Russia with the biggest power in the area, i.e.
                                              > Byzantium.

                                              I don't see any reason to suspect that Vladimir's conversion was for a
                                              political alliance. Look at some other conversions in history, which were
                                              clearly for political reasons, i.e. Hungary, Lithuania, etc. Russian
                                              conversion does not follow up with any sort of political deal. Vladimir only
                                              gets the emperor's daughter in marriage. Vladimir personally oversees the
                                              spread of the new faith in the most distant regions of his empire, but does
                                              not care about spreading it outside Russia, i.e. in the steppes.

                                              I was also going to add that some researchers have suggested that Vladimir,
                                              while prince of Novgorod, left Russia to take part in Viking raids on
                                              London. You can read the details in Volkov's book "Vladimir, the Russian
                                              Viking." I think it's only the writer's point of view.


                                              Alex
                                            • Kresimir Zeravica
                                              ... Yep, and that term (good deeds) is used somewhat differently in the theological circles so I just wanted to point that out, no harm intended, really, I
                                              Message 22 of 29 , May 29, 2003
                                              • 0 Attachment
                                                --- "Alex Grant [T]" <tower@...> wrote:
                                                > Sorry, it wasn't me.
                                                > It's considered good to repent - and that is what I
                                                > called a good deed - but
                                                > it does not necessarily qualify one for sainthood. I
                                                > wouldn't even discuss
                                                > it here.

                                                Yep, and that term (good deeds) is used somewhat
                                                differently in the theological circles so I just
                                                wanted to point that out, no harm intended, really, I
                                                promise :)

                                                __________________________________
                                                Do you Yahoo!?
                                                Yahoo! Calendar - Free online calendar with sync to Outlook(TM).
                                                http://calendar.yahoo.com
                                              • douglas petroff
                                                A quick point... only gets the emporer s daughter Whew. Pretty big only. Besides the dowery, and prestige, LEGITIMACY- as you mention, Vlad was a Viking
                                                Message 23 of 29 , May 29, 2003
                                                • 0 Attachment
                                                  A quick point... "only gets the emporer's daughter" Whew. Pretty big only. Besides the dowery, and prestige, LEGITIMACY- as you mention, Vlad was a Viking (Ruikine) ruler, and historically, the marrying into that kind of royalty could have cemented line line for centuries. Plus, many forget the Byzantines were the ROMANS....with a claim of Romulus as an early ancestor. If you were able to claim 1200 years of ruling family behind you, along with the fact that your brother in law ran the church as you know it, pretty hefty stuff, albeit intangible. Could the Papacy make the same offer? And religiously, who was the head of either the Jewish or Islamic religion, who could you even go to in order to have somebody says "yep, its his family that should be running things..." Also, even if Vladimir wasn't playing politics, (which I wouldn't want to bet against) the Byzantine's certainly seemed to be using the ploy of "I'll give you my daughter if you do _____________________ for me. Sorry for the quick drive by. Sergius B

                                                  [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                                                • Laura Todd
                                                  ... From: Alex Grant [T] [mailto:tower@axs.net] Sent: Wednesday, May 28, 2003 9:59 PM To: sig@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [sig] Re: Prince Vladimir ... have
                                                  Message 24 of 29 , May 29, 2003
                                                  • 0 Attachment
                                                    -----Original Message-----
                                                    From: Alex Grant [T] [mailto:tower@...]
                                                    Sent: Wednesday, May 28, 2003 9:59 PM
                                                    To: sig@yahoogroups.com
                                                    Subject: Re: [sig] Re: Prince Vladimir


                                                    > Because I am writing about the last days of the Khazars, and they would
                                                    have
                                                    > viewed Vladimir as an antagonist & maybe an enemy.

                                                    >Not sure they would. AFAIK, Svyatoslav destroyed the Khazar elite, who did
                                                    not have a loyal army. Much of the Khazar army were mercenaries, who didn't
                                                    have the will to defend their lords when the Russians arrived, and many of
                                                    them just ran away.

                                                    There is certainly no historical record to back up this speculation. I am
                                                    writing on the assumption that the Khazar armies were just as loyal as any
                                                    army defending their homeland. In fact, my fictional account goes on the
                                                    assumption that the Byzantines had a hand in helping the Rus conquer Sarkel.
                                                    Fictional assumption of course, based on the fact that Byzantium was skilled
                                                    at pulling strings and setting one neighboring state against another. There
                                                    is an actual Byz. document about "how to make war on the Khazars".

                                                    >If there's going to be magic involved, I can't argue. But, I would still
                                                    suggest looking into the Polovtsi and Pechenegs, who were Russia's main
                                                    concern in the steppe, after Svyatoslav destroyed the Khazars in the steppe.
                                                    The Byzantines may be a different story, since they had an alliance with
                                                    Khazaria previously.

                                                    And in 1016 the Byzantines made an alliance with the Rus against the
                                                    Khazars. I would sure love to know more about this, but I guess I'll have to
                                                    make it up--schemes & plots, character motivations, etc.

                                                    > I don't see any reason to suspect that Vladimir's conversion was for a
                                                    political alliance.

                                                    Because Byzantium was the Big Time back then. It gave the Russians more
                                                    class than they had had as a pack of pagan Vikings.

                                                    Bye,
                                                    Laura
                                                  • Alex Grant [T]
                                                    ... Sarkel. ... skilled ... There ... You re right about the Byzantines ability to pull strings, make alliances, and pit states against each other. But I
                                                    Message 25 of 29 , May 29, 2003
                                                    • 0 Attachment
                                                      > There is certainly no historical record to back up this speculation. I am
                                                      > writing on the assumption that the Khazar armies were just as loyal as any
                                                      > army defending their homeland. In fact, my fictional account goes on the
                                                      > assumption that the Byzantines had a hand in helping the Rus conquer
                                                      Sarkel.
                                                      > Fictional assumption of course, based on the fact that Byzantium was
                                                      skilled
                                                      > at pulling strings and setting one neighboring state against another.
                                                      There
                                                      > is an actual Byz. document about "how to make war on the Khazars".

                                                      You're right about the Byzantines' ability to pull strings, make alliances,
                                                      and pit states against each other. But I believe the baptism of Russia was
                                                      Vladimir's initiative, and the Byzantines probably followed up by creating
                                                      alliances for various purposes, knowing well the Russians' ability to fight.
                                                      Also, since Byzantine engineers and architects built the Sarkel fortress for
                                                      the Khazars, it would not sound right that Constantinople supported the Rus
                                                      in conquering the stronghold. But the more fiction you put into the book,
                                                      the less you have to adhere to any historical accounts. So, it's up to you.

                                                      Alex
                                                    • Alex Grant [T]
                                                      ... Besides the dowery, and prestige, LEGITIMACY- as you mention, Vlad was a Viking (Ruikine) ruler, and historically, the marrying into that kind of royalty
                                                      Message 26 of 29 , May 29, 2003
                                                      • 0 Attachment
                                                        > A quick point... "only gets the emporer's daughter" Whew. Pretty big only.
                                                        Besides the dowery, and prestige, LEGITIMACY- as you mention, Vlad was a
                                                        Viking (Ruikine) ruler, and historically, the marrying into that kind of
                                                        royalty could have cemented line line for centuries. Plus, many forget the
                                                        Byzantines were the ROMANS....with a claim of Romulus as an early ancestor.
                                                        If you were able to claim 1200 years of ruling family behind you, along with
                                                        the fact that your brother in law ran the church as you know it, pretty
                                                        hefty stuff, albeit intangible. Could the Papacy make the same offer? And
                                                        religiously, who was the head of either the Jewish or Islamic religion, who
                                                        could you even go to in order to have somebody says "yep, its his family
                                                        that should be running things..." Also, even if Vladimir wasn't playing
                                                        politics, (which I wouldn't want to bet against) the Byzantine's certainly
                                                        seemed to be using the ploy of "I'll give you my daughter if you do
                                                        _____________________ for me. Sorry for the quick drive by. Sergius B


                                                        If I remember the details correctly, the Greeks at first sent a woman
                                                        disquised as the emperor's daughter, but she and her guards were ambushed en
                                                        route and all perished. The Byzantines intended not to keep their promise of
                                                        sending the royalty in exchange for Vladimir's return of the port of Kherson
                                                        in the Crimea, which he conquered from the Byz. Only after Vladimir
                                                        threatened to attack again, the Byzantines finally agreed to send the real
                                                        princess. So, that's the only politics I see in the whole episode. Of
                                                        course, there could be more, but we can only speculate, especially whether
                                                        it was related to the act of national baptism or to something else.

                                                        I personally think that Vladimir chose not accept the Roman faith precisely
                                                        because of political obligations that would come with it, whereas
                                                        Constantinople did not impose any such obligations on the Russians upon
                                                        conversion. Rome is notorious for making such demands throughout European
                                                        history.

                                                        Also, I don't see any reason to call Vladimir a Viking ruler, he was a
                                                        Russian ruler. Viking is not a nationality or a country, it's a profession,
                                                        and Vlidimir did not practice it, because he was a hereditary grand prince
                                                        of a country. Vladimir called himself Russian and was born and lived in the
                                                        country called Rus, which was founded by his ancestors.


                                                        Hope this helps.

                                                        Alex
                                                      • Kinjal of Moravia
                                                        ... Yes, but Rus means oarsman and is Varengian in origin. He may not have practiced Nordic tradition but it is there, as is all of Kiev. Also, why do not
                                                        Message 27 of 29 , May 30, 2003
                                                        • 0 Attachment
                                                          --- In sig@yahoogroups.com, "Alex Grant [T]" <tower@a...> wrote:
                                                          Yes, but 'Rus' means oarsman and is Varengian in origin. He may not
                                                          have practiced Nordic tradition but it is there, as is all of Kiev.
                                                          Also, why do not we speak more of the Alani who are part of the
                                                          blood and spirit of all Slavic people? Why it is unfortunatate that
                                                          they perished in the sun plague of 1340, they were still a dominate
                                                          culture for more than 3000 years. Even Ganghis Khan did not fight
                                                          them. Their treaty with Rome lasted more that 1400 years, the
                                                          longest in Roman history -- yet they are hardly mentioned.

                                                          Kinjal
                                                        • Alexey Kiyaikin
                                                          Greetings Wednesday, May 28, 2003, 1:50:25 PM, you wrote: Kac Who were the Teutons ? The Crusaders. The Pope proclaimed the crusade into the pagan lands of
                                                          Message 28 of 29 , May 30, 2003
                                                          • 0 Attachment
                                                            Greetings

                                                            Wednesday, May 28, 2003, 1:50:25 PM, you wrote:

                                                            Kac> Who were the Teutons ?

                                                            The Crusaders. The Pope proclaimed the crusade into the "pagan" lands
                                                            of European north-east. Thus, there was a lot of trouble with Livonian
                                                            & Teutonic Orders. Some Mongol troops were used in battles at
                                                            borders.


                                                            --
                                                            Bye,
                                                            Alex mailto:Posadnik@...
                                                          • Alex Grant [T]
                                                            ... I guess this is in reference to my statement. It still doesn t change my point that Vladimir was a Russian and not a Viking. The name of the country may
                                                            Message 29 of 29 , Jun 1, 2003
                                                            • 0 Attachment
                                                              > Yes, but 'Rus' means oarsman and is Varengian in origin. He may not
                                                              > have practiced Nordic tradition but it is there, as is all of Kiev.
                                                              > Also, why do not we speak more of the Alani who are part of the
                                                              > blood and spirit of all Slavic people? Why it is unfortunatate that
                                                              > they perished in the sun plague of 1340, they were still a dominate
                                                              > culture for more than 3000 years. Even Ganghis Khan did not fight
                                                              > them. Their treaty with Rome lasted more that 1400 years, the
                                                              > longest in Roman history -- yet they are hardly mentioned.
                                                              >
                                                              > Kinjal

                                                              I guess this is in reference to my statement.
                                                              It still doesn't change my point that Vladimir was a Russian and not a
                                                              Viking. The name of the country may trace to a Varangian root, or may not,
                                                              but still doesn't change this. I am not sure which Nordic tradition you
                                                              refer to that's "there," but I can't think of any during Vladimir's time.
                                                              One event that may be attributed to a non-Slavic practice was the human
                                                              sacrifice of two Christians in Kiev prior to Vladimir's conversion, but it
                                                              was an exception.

                                                              I'm sorry I don't know that much about the Alans, however, the Russian
                                                              Chronicles often refer to the Slavic homeland being in the Danube river
                                                              valley, rather than in the Caucasus region, where the Alani were.

                                                              Alex
                                                            Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.