The difference between crests and Russians. The main differences between Ukrainians and Russians

Ukrainians often surprise me with their complete ignorance of their history - even at the level of the elementary school curriculum.
But Russians, oddly enough, commit the same sin.
It is quite common to hear idiotic phrases from Russians that Kyiv is “the mother of Russian cities”, and the territory of Ukraine is “the cradle of Russian civilization”. Ukrainians are often considered Russians who have simply been brainwashed by anti-Russian propaganda.
I know that such versions are quite widespread.
But all this is nonsense.
About the same nonsense as about Alaska, which Catherine allegedly sold.
Often, ignorance of history turns into mutual hatred and tragedy. It is necessary to know history. It is no less necessary than knowing mathematics.
Therefore, let's try to remember the real story - at least at the most basic, schematic level.

During the early Middle Ages, numerous tribes of our ancestors lived in vast areas, from the Baltic to the Danube. In the area of Lake Ilmen, a tribe of Slavs lived (that’s what it was called - Slavs); in the Pskov-Velikie Luki region lived the Krivichi; in the Ryazan-Oryol area (I call modern cities to make it clearer what area we are talking about) - Vyatichi (which had nothing to do with the modern Vyatka River); on the territory of modern Belarus - Polochans (north) and Dregovichi (south); In the Chernigov-Sumy region - northerners; in the Smolensk-Lubech area - Radimichi; in the Pripyat River basin - the Drevlyans; in the Western Bug River basin - Volynians; on the territory of modern Galicia (western Ukraine) - white Croats (it was from here that part of the tribe later went to the territory of modern Croatia); in the area of Kyiv and the Ros River - glade; in the area between the Southern Bug and the Dniester - streets; between the Dniester and the Prut (modern Moldova) - Tivertsy.
Gradually, greatest success in development, the Slavic tribe reached the strongest and most numerous. Perhaps because, being far from the steppe regions, the Slavs were not exposed to the dangers of invasions - and also because in a cooler climate, outbreaks of all kinds of infections, epidemics, and epizootics occur less frequently.
In turn, within the tribe itself, the group that lived in the area of the Russa settlement gained strength - perhaps because there were salt pans there since ancient times (Staraya Russa, Novgorod region - and today a popular resort, a kind of northern Kislovodsk); and salt was quite highly valued in the old days. In addition, these breweries were located in an advantageous location - here the rivers ran along trade route"from the Varangians to the Greeks." At the same time, unlike distant Sivash (where salt was also mined), there was no danger from wild nomads. It is not surprising that the clan of Russian Slavs rose above other tribesmen. This has happened quite often in history. It is enough to remember how the clan of the Romans rose among the tribe of the Latins, and then, in turn, among the Romans the clan of patricians rose, who looked at the plebeians with contempt.
This is how a division arose - into “simply” Slavs, and Russian Slavs (or, simply, Rus).
Gradually, the Russians took power over all the Slavs - and then over a number of other tribes (for example, over the Krivichi). And over time, it became a practice to call all those tribes that were under the direct power of the Russians Russian. And those tribes that were not under the rule of the Russians, but at the same time their blood-linguistic kinship was felt (unlike, say, the Germans, or the Finno-Ugrians, who were very obvious strangers), were called Slavs - that is, similar to the Slavs , similar to the Slavs. At the same time, the Finno-Ugrians, all en masse, were called Chud, the nomads - infidels, the peoples of Scandinavia - Varangians, and the peoples central Europe- Germans (that is, dumb, unable to speak our language). These terms have taken root and become widely used.
Subsequently, north of Ilmen a new town, which, without further ado, was called Novgorod. The city grew quickly and gradually became the capital of the emerging Russian state.
In 862, the Russian expeditionary force (to put it in modern terms), led by the Prophetic Oleg (who, by the way, was not a prince at all) set out from the then capital of Rus', Novgorod, in a southern direction - with the goal of placing under real, unconditional Russian control, the entire space between the Baltic and the Black Sea (all the way "from the Varangians to the Greeks"). Rus' at that time was already quite strong public education to set such global goals for their troops.
During the campaign, the Russians simultaneously asserted power among the tribes through whose lands they passed.
This was not in the nature of a bloody conquest. The tribes were weak and primitive, the Russians were a strong, civilized people - with whom no one wanted to argue. So the town (settlement) of Smolensk, then Lyubech, was annexed without bloodshed. Moving further south, the Russians saw the small town of Kyiv, in the vicinity of which lived the Polyan tribe, which paid tribute to the Khazars.
Kyiv was also occupied by the Russian army - and the glades became part of the Russian state.
Modern historians attach exaggerated importance to this event. The year 862 began to be considered the year of the founding of a unified Russian state - and Oleg the Prophet began to be perceived as the founder of Rus'. Many incredible myths arose. Allegedly, the Prophetic Oleg moved the capital to Kyiv, allegedly he proclaimed Kyiv “the mother of Russian cities”...
All this is nonsense, of course - in the spirit of gossip that Kabaeva has already given birth to her second child from Putin.
The annexation of Kyiv was no fundamentally different from the annexation of, say, Smolensk or Lyubech. If someone had told Oleg then, pointing to Kyiv, that in front of him was “the mother of Russian cities,” he probably would have laughed for a long time. Kyiv at that time was a small provincial town on the outskirts of the Slavic world. Oleg simply could not move the capital somewhere, because, I repeat, he was not a prince at all. Resolving such issues was not within his competence.
As for the fiction that the word Rus comes from the name of the river Ros, this version is so primitive that it doesn’t even cause laughter. Only a poor student of primary school age can believe in her.
Ros is a small river, which even now is unremarkable; there is not a single large city on its banks. And in the old days, this was generally the border between the lands of the Slavs and the nomads of the Pechenegs-Polovtsians. There was not and could not be a permanent population in such a dangerous, controversial place. The Slavic tribe closest to the river were the Polyans. I would like to especially emphasize that nowhere and never, not a single people on the globe, was called by the name of a river or mountain. Because first people appear (who by that time already call themselves somehow) - and then these people give names to rivers, mountains, and so on. The name Ros most likely comes from the word "dew". There are quite a lot of rivers with this name in Russia.
Why is it customary to consider 862 the year of the founding of a unified Russian state?
There are several reasons for this - from purely Russophobic speculation to the primitive desire of would-be historians to put everything under some kind of framework, to come up with some kind of date for everything.
For example, February 23 is celebrated in Russia as Armed Forces Day.
But why? What happened on February 23?
And nothing happened - absolutely. You just need some exact date, “for show.”
In fact, no one knows the exact date of the founding of such world empires as Rus', China, or Rome. Here is the Republic of Burundi, or the Republic of Honduras - proclaimed on such and such a date, such and such a month, such and such a year. For Burundi or Honduras this is normal. When they disappear, this will also be recorded with precision.
And Rus', China, or Rome are eternal. Nobody knows exactly when they appeared. And they never die without a trace. For example, the Roman Empire has perished more than once. And each time it was revived again and again - either in the form of the empire of Charlemagne, then in the form of the “Holy Roman Empire of the German people”, then in the form of Napoleon’s empire, then in the form of the Third Reich, then in the form modern European Union. The same goes for Russia and China.
This, by the way, is not my definition. This is the legendary French general and President, Charles de Gaulle, who came to the USSR and traveled around the country, visiting different cities after talking with the most different people(he spoke a little Russian), said publicly that Russia is eternal...
Having successfully completed the task assigned to them, the troops under the leadership Prophetic Oleg- returned to Novgorod land.
In 907, a new campaign was undertaken - this time against Byzantium.
The campaign was successful, Oleg’s victory was complete. Byzantium became a tributary of Rus'. Oleg nailed his shield to the gates of the Byzantine capital as a sign of Russian victory.
At the end of the campaign, Oleg and the army returned to their homeland. But the prince (Igor) decided that, taking into account the new political realities, taking into account the fact that the power of Rus' now extends to Byzantium, he should move his headquarters closer to the conquered lands, closer to the south.
His choice fell on Kyiv.
About the same thing happened that, many centuries later, Peter I did - having won access to the Baltic Sea, he moved the capital to the annexed lands. This does not mean that the cradle of Rus' was in the swamps on which St. Petersburg was founded. This does not mean that St. Petersburg was the “mother of Russian cities.” In the same way, the distant border outskirts on which the small town of Kiev existed, which had never been the mother, father, nephew, or wife of Russian cities, was not the cradle of Russia.
It must be said right away that “capital” for that era is a very relative concept. For example, no one can name the capital of Ancient China. Because the capitals were where the emperor's court was located - and the court at times moved from city to city. At the same time, not every emperor kept the entire country under his rule, from which large principalities were separated, which also had something like capitals.
The same situation is with the empire of Charlemagne, which did not have not only a single capital, but also a name. Now, purely conventionally, it is customary to call this state (by the way, a powerful one) the Frankish Empire, and the capital to designate the city of Aachen (in our time - located in Germany).
And in Rus', the courtyard could move anywhere. Moreover, there could be several courtyards (do not forget about princely civil strife). Therefore, you should not imagine the matter in such a way that if the court moved to Kyiv for some time, then Kyiv immediately became a kind of incomparable metropolis. Novgorod unconditionally remained the largest city in Rus'. Rostov (now in the Yaroslavl region), Suzdal, Vladimir, and Pskov also stood out. A prince who was not the prince of Novgorod or Rostov could not even hope to take power in Kyiv. For example, Yaroslav the Wise reigned for most of his adult life in Novgorod and Rostov.
Prince Svyatoslav generally moved the capital from Kyiv to the banks of the Danube (after he conquered Bulgaria).
And over time, Rus' was divided into several principalities, each of which was, in fact, an independent state - including one with its own capital. Cities such as Vladimir and Pskov have become larger than Kyiv.
If at the initial stage, after the capital was moved to Kyiv, this gave impetus to the development of the city, then later this turned into a whole bunch of problems for Kyiv. Because every prince tried to capture this city. And they captured. Robbed. They burned...
By 1240, when the Mongols approached the walls of Kyiv, only a shadow of its short-lived greatness remained from the former city.
Just please, don’t refer to the term “Kievan Rus”. This term was introduced into use by historians of the 19th century, simply in order to somehow designate the pre-Mongol era in the history of Rus'. People who lived in the state that we today conventionally call Kievan Rus had no idea that their country was called that way. Just like the ancient Romans and ancient Greeks, they had no idea that they were ancient. And just like the residents medieval Europe, had no idea that they were medieval. On the contrary, they believed that they lived in Lately and, for example, in the year 1000, they seriously expected the end of the world.
But then the year 1237 came.
To Northwestern Rus' (modern central Russia) hordes of Mongols moved in (in fact, there weren’t that many Mongols there, it was all of Asia on horseback. For example, the battering machines were made and operated by Chinese craftsmen).
The casualties were terrible, many cities were burned.
But for all that, the largest, most powerful principality - Novgorod (whose lands stretched from the Baltic to the Urals) - was almost not affected by the invasion. As well as a number of other lands (for example, Pskov). Some cities managed to come to an agreement with the Mongols and were not destroyed (for example, Yaroslavl and Kostroma). Some fought off the invasion (for example, Smolensk).
Moreover, even those principalities that were invaded were not completely depopulated, thanks to the abundance of forests, swamps, and rivers. People had a place to hide. And the smart, careful, cunning policy of Alexander Nevsky reduced the victories of the Mongols to the bare minimum.
Russian captives were ransomed, Russian cities were rebuilt, Russian principalities retained all the attributes of independence (their money, armies, borders, their princes, their international connections) - getting off only by paying tribute. The forests and swamps of the North-West did not attract the Mongols as pastures; they never tried to live on these lands.
In 1240, the Mongols launched a new campaign - this time against the principalities that were located on the territory of modern Ukraine.
Here everything was immeasurably worse.
The trip was better organized. The massacre quickly took on the character of total genocide. The Galician-Volyn princes (the most powerful in those parts) made a colossal mistake by relying on Europe and deciding to stop the conquerors by military force. And the terrain in Ukraine is steppe, sparsely forested. Nomads have plenty of freedom, but peasants have nowhere to hide.
What remains of Ukraine is a scorched field.
Then the Mongols made a successful, crushing campaign against the united forces of Europe, defeated all their enemies without exception (there is an opinion that the Europeans allegedly repelled their attack - but this is not true) reached the Adriatic Sea (which was mistaken for the Atlantic Ocean) - and, tired of the campaign, burdened with booty, they returned to the Black Sea steppes, thus becoming direct neighbors of the surviving inhabitants of modern Ukraine.
It was a complete, utter disaster.
A few European travelers noted in their notes that all that was left of Kyiv was a wretched village of 200-300 houses,where unhappy people live, cruelly oppressed by the Tatars.
Russians from the territory modern Russia(for example, the Novgorodians), as best they could, helped people from the defeated outskirts. For example, in Western Ukraine there is the town of Galich - which was once the center of this entire region (that is why Western Ukraine is called Galicia). The Novgorodians ransomed the inhabitants of this city, driven into slavery by the Mongols, and settled them on the territory of the modern Kostroma region. Therefore, today in the Kostroma region there is a city called Galich.
Bloodless Galicia (Lviv, Ternopil, Ivano-Frankivsk) retained signs of statehood for some time - but this did not last very long.
Various predators and new owners began to flock to the devastated lands.
At first they were Lithuanians. Then the Lithuanians themselves fell under the rule of the Poles. And if the Lithuanians treated the Slavic population quite calmly, the Poles turned the remnants of this population into absolutely powerless slaves. “Slave” and “cattle” - these were the Poles’ names for the remnants of the Russian population (mixed by that time with Tatars and Lithuanians).
And besides the Poles, Hungarians and even Moldovans went after the spoils. Plus, Jewish tenants (who enjoyed the special favor of the Poles), Armenian merchants, and many others swarmed like locusts.
At the same time, the raids of the Tatars continued constantly, and they formed their own Crimean Tatar horde near Ukraine. Then the Tatars themselves fell under the rule of the Turks - and the new owners also loved to profit from the Slavic lands (the Tatars, being tributaries of the Turks, did not stop raiding).
All more or less intelligent, active people from among the Russian population fled from this troubled outskirts to the Novgorod lands and Vladimir-Moscow Rus', which already in 1380 defeated the Mongols on the Kulikovo Field, and in 1480 put an end to any kind of dependence forever.
Three large states gradually emerged - Russia, the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth (Poland) and Ottoman Empire(Türkiye). And the borders of these states cut modern Ukraine into three parts. Sumy, Kharkov, Donbass - it was Russia (without any reservations). Odessa, Nikolaev, Kherson, Crimea - these were the lands of the Crimean Tatars, subject to Turkey. Kiev, Lvov, Poltava, Vinnitsa, Rivne - this was Poland (on which Tatar raids did not stop), Chernivtsi - Moldova (itself a tributary of the Turks), Transcarpathia - Hungary. And this state of affairs lasted for centuries.
It was during this period (approximately from the end of the 16th century), from the mixed population of the outskirts of three large states, that a separate ethnic group began to emerge. From mixed and distorted words- a jargon began to take shape, in which representatives of different nations, whom the vicissitudes of fate had brought together, could at least explain to each other.
At first, foreigners habitually called all this confusion Russian. Then the word “Cherkasy” came into use. The words “Ukraine” and “Ukrainians” were rarely used until the uprising of Bohdan Khmelnytsky.
It should be noted that around the same time, on the American continent, such nations as, for example, Brazilians, Argentines, Mexicans began to slowly form - as a result of mixing different races and peoples.
In 1648, Bogdan Khmelnitsky, taking advantage of internal strife in Poland (there was no king there and there was a squabble for power), led the Zaporozhye Cossacks to Poland. He was not a stupid man, he had seen a lot in life. Therefore, instead of making an ordinary, predatory raid on Poland, he decided to make the highest bet, a bet on a general anti-Polish, anti-Catholic uprising. In addition, he entered into an alliance with the Crimean Khan.
Poland had a hard time. For the first time, the Poles encountered a man who managed to attract almost all non-Polish forces to his side (however, Western Ukraine took almost no part in this).
But in the end, the rebels began to squabble among themselves - and the Poles settled their problems and attacked Ukraine. A form of genocide began there. The Poles treated the local population in much the same way as the Spanish conquistadors treated the Indians on the American continent.
Huge crowds of refugees poured towards the Russian border. Russia allowed them to settle in the border lands. That is why and only why, in the Kharkov-Sumy-Donbass regions, a noticeable layer of the Ukrainian population was formed.
Meanwhile, the situation of the rebels became hopeless. The Tatars turned out to be unreliable allies.
And then Bogdan Khmelnitsky turned to Russia with a request to take the Ukrainian lands under its hand.
Russia showed caution. Khmelnitsky had to make such requests 6 times.
Finally, a decision was made in Moscow.
In 1654, the famous Pereyaslavl Rada took place, at which it was proclaimed clearly, unequivocally, publicly, in the presence of the clergy: “Forever with Russia, forever with the Russian people.” Notice that it was not said: “Until such and such a year with Russia - and then apart.” It was not said: “As long as Russia is rich and strong, while it strokes our fur, we are with Russia. But if something is wrong, then we stand aside.” No - it was said: “Forever with Russia - forever with the Russian people!” Exactly this way, and not some other way. Bogdan Khmelnitsky (knowing well his fellow tribesmen and the value of their oaths) deliberately walked around the Cossacks in public, approached different elders separately and asked if they all completely agreed with what was happening? And I invariably heard affirmative exclamations in response...
Who did the Russians see before them when they returned to their ancestral lands in 1654?
Alas, before them there was a people only vaguely reminiscent of the Slavs.
Look at old (and not only old) paintings by Ukrainian artists. Who do you see in them? You will see in these paintings lop-moustached, black-haired men, in trousers and boots with curved toes, sitting in a meadow with a pipe in their teeth, their legs tucked under them in a Turkish style - and thin, black-haired, black-eyed girls. If you don’t know who is depicted in the picture, you may well think that they are Turks.
The Russians heard a strange conversation, in which it was difficult to discern the highly distorted Russian language, littered with borrowings and vulgarisms. However, this was by no means the language that today is commonly called the “Ukrainian literary language.” It was the so-called surzhik - which is precisely the Ukrainian dialect of the Great Russian language.
However, at that time, the Russians still had little idea what their new allies were. Therefore, they sincerely and decisively attacked the Poles and Tatars. And they achieved great success. Both the Poles and the Tatars were defeated. In addition, the Swedes attacked the Poles from the north, occupying Warsaw and Krakow. It seemed that Poland had ceased to exist.
And then the irreparable happened - Bogdan Khmelnitsky died.
And the essence of those who had recently sworn allegiance to Russia was immediately revealed.
The atamans of Khmelnitsky (and even his own son) began to muddy the waters against Russia, began to weave conspiracies, entering into alliances with the Turks, Tatars and the half-dead Poles. At the same time, without hesitation, they handed over Ukrainian cities to the Tatars for plunder. The Russians suddenly saw that they were dealing with a gang of scoundrels and savages, devoid of conscience, intelligence, and the ability to see even a little further than their nose. It got to the point that the courtiers began to advise the Russian Tsar to abandon Ukraine to hell and withdraw troops to the Russian borders. But the Russian Tsar, a pious and decent man (he was not a Ukrainian!) was horrified by the thought of giving the Orthodox (albeit dissolute) people into the hands of the Turks and Tatars.
Meanwhile, the Poles managed, through incredible exertion of all their strength, to fight off the Swedes.
And in Ukraine the leapfrog continued with all sorts of conspiracies. Every bandit who had a gang of a couple of dozen people imagined himself as a hetman, easily entering into negotiations with the same Poles or Turks.
In the end, the Russians and Poles, driven to white heat by the insane behavior of the Ukrainians, decided to put an end to all this nonsense - and divided Ukraine along the Dnieper.
Then, over time, step by step, century after century, central Ukraine became part of Russia, followed by Volyn.
Under tough but reasonable Russian leadership, Ukraine recovered, fed itself up, and came to its senses. The Russians built cities and roads, plants and factories, canals and mills, mines and mines in Ukraine - turning a wild field into a developed industrial and agricultural region. There is no reservation about the wild field. A significant part of Ukraine, before joining Russia, officially bore the name “Wild Field”.
Ukrainians, under the rule of the Russians, gradually became civilized, learned to dress normally, wash regularly, learned to read and write, and began to more or less resemble Europeans. In the east, which previously became part of Russia, the level of civilization was higher. In the center and west - lower. But still, the impression was created that something good was beginning to emerge from the Ukrainians.
Meanwhile, Galicia, Transcarpathia and Bukovina were part of Austria-Hungary. The situation there was radically different. The population of this area remained deeply downtrodden and rural. And among this rural population, the Austrians, in their own interests, instilled brutal anti-Polish and anti-Russian sentiments. The so-called “Ukrainian literary language” was gradually invented and began to be introduced into the masses - an ugly, completely artificial creation that had never been the language used to communicate at home, in a close circle. In addition, people were forced to abandon the faith of their fathers and introduced Uniatism - an artificial pseudo-religion, the analogues of which do not exist anywhere else in the world. A sort of mixture of Orthodoxy and Catholicism. The real religion of slaves.
In 1917, a revolution occurred in Russia and a civil war began.
And it immediately became clear that the Ukrainians were civilized only externally, under the supervision of the Russian authorities. When supervision disappeared, chaos began again. Each district had its own “father” with a gang of thugs.
On top of that, Ukraine was occupied by the troops of the Kaiser’s Germany, together with the Austrians.
The Germans decided to create a puppet pseudo-state in the occupied territories, led by a pseudo-government.
The planting of the so-called "Ukrainian literary language" - which, in general, was met with ridicule by the population of Ukraine itself.
But the Germans in Ukraine could not resist. And the Bolsheviks-Trotskyists, who replaced the Germans, in a fit of Russophobia, also indulged in the all-out imposition of the “Ukrainian literary language.” However, despite all efforts, this pseudo-language never became popular.
The Soviet government spoke long and tediously about the brotherhood and community of all Soviet peoples.
But alas, Ukrainians are too different from Russians. They have at most 30% Russian blood. The remaining 70% is Polish, Tatar, Turkish, Jewish, Hungarian, Gypsy, Armenian, Moldavian, Lithuanian, Austrian blood.
That is, this is already a separate ethnic group, albeit definitely related to the Russians.
Surzhik, which he speaks most of Ukrainians - this is the Ukrainian dialect of the Russian language, which may someday develop into the real Ukrainian language.
Long centuries of slavery, numerous invasions of foreign predators, constant humiliation, oppression, mass rape of women, complete violation of basic human rights - left their indelible imprint on the character of Ukrainians. Genetic memory- a strong and merciless thing.
Unlike a Russian, a Ukrainian (even if he outwardly resembles a Russian) is secretive, greedy, helpful, mean, cruel, stupid, thieving, boastful, lascivious, pathologically vain, and incapable of sound introspection. A Ukrainian cannot be smart - he can be cunning. A Ukrainian may seem like a good business executive if his activities are controlled from above by people of a different nationality (for example, Russians). But if you leave a Ukrainian to his own devices, everything will go wrong for him. Ukrainians definitely need a shepherd. Suffice it to recall how the Ukrainians, over the 23 years of their independence, turned one of the most highly developed republics of the former USSR into a shameful backward horde, into a supplier of guest workers and prostitutes to the world market. Ukrainians can be compared with blacks - who also spent too long in slavery, and whose genetics are also distorted.
A Ukrainian woman is always “weak at the front”. There are no exceptions among them. Among Russians, only mentally disabled, mentally ill women are prone to such behavior. A Ukrainian woman can have any diploma, or even a bunch of diplomas, and still remain a complete, frostbitten whore. If no one wants to pay her for sex, she will pay for sex herself. This is a legacy of those times when Ukrainian women were the constant prey of Tatar-Turkish gangs, Polish-Lithuanian-Hungarian-Austrian masters, Jewish tenants (who usually kept the entire surrounding population in strict bondage) and Armenian merchants.
Perhaps, over time, the twisted psyche of Ukrainians (and Ukrainian women) will straighten out - but this will probably happen in two to three hundred years. And then, provided that they live under the control of some civilized, developed nation. For example - under the control of the Russians.
Especially for those Ukrainians who want to be indignant after reading what I wrote, I want to say: there is no need to show me your indignation - I don’t really care about it. We need to change our behavior, we need to learn to see ourselves, our actions, from the outside. Please note - I do not write anything like this about the Japanese or Norwegians. Because all of the above is not typical for the Japanese or Norwegians. This is typical for Ukrainians. If you want people to have a different opinion about you, become different.
By no means do I want to say that Russians have no shortcomings. There are a lot of shortcomings - and I often write about this on my blog. But in this particular case, I am talking about Ukrainians. And I'm not trying to bite them. I’m just reminding readers of a real, not fictional story.
I’m just tired of reading outright fiction and nonsense that the Internet is teeming with...

15 points why Ukrainians and Russians are two separate peoples (ethnicities, nations).

1. Ukrainians have their own ethnic territory, where they have lived compactly for many centuries. The ethnic territory of the Russians is located to the northeast of it and does not intersect with it. Ukrainians cannot be classified as a subethnic group of Russians (Muscovites), since even the imperial ideologists of the 19th century did not think so, and also because the well-known Russian subethnic groups (Kamchadals, Pomors, etc.) are characterized by weak differences in language and culture among themselves, extreme small numbers and dispersion resettlement. A Polish map from 1927 shows the ethnic territory of Ukrainians (the Poles called them Ruthenians). As you can see, they inhabited the entire mainland Ukraine, together with the Crimean Tatars - Crimea, and also lived in neighboring regions of Slovakia, Poland, Belarus and the RSFSR. But during the long-term Russification carried out by the Soviet authorities in the 20th century, Ukrainians living in the RSFSR were assimilated and turned into Russians. It is important to note that the Ukrainian people's republic appeared and gained independence in 1917-1918 thanks to the efforts of ordinary Ukrainians - immigrants from the territory of the Russian Empire, and with minimal participation of Galicians. After all, Galicia was then part of Austria-Hungary and united with the UPR only in 1919 after the collapse of the Austrian empire.

2. Ukrainians and Russians have different things ethnic origin. Ukrainians were formed around the 13th century through the consolidation of certain Slavic ethnic groups (White Croats, Volhynians, Drevlyans, Polyans, Severians, Tivertsi and Ulichs), incorporating Scythian-Sarmatian and some Thracian components, and later influenced by Turkic nomads. The Russians arose at about the same time from the unification of other Slavic tribes (Vyatichi, Ilmen Slovenes, Pskov and Tver Krivichi), absorbing the Finno-Ugric and, to a lesser extent, Baltic components, and then assimilating part of the Belarusians, Vepsians, Tatars and other peoples. In the 9th-11th centuries, the Polans were called Rus - the most important ethnic group Kievan Rus. Later, in the 12th-15th centuries, the entire East Slavic population belonging to Orthodox Church, were collectively called Russia, Ruthenians or Russian people. And after the collapse of the Republic of Ingushetia, the Great Russians (Muscovites) turned the term “Russians” into an ethnonym, monopolizing it, despite the fact that the main successor of Kievan Rus is Ukraine. A similar situation can be observed among the Romanians, whose ethnonym is similar to the name of Roman citizens in Latin, Italian and Romanian. Initially, only Roman townspeople were considered Romans, from the 3rd century - the entire free population of the Roman state, and even later residents of the northeastern outskirts former empire took the designation of Roman citizenship as an ethnonym, although the true heir ancient Rome is Italy.

3. Ukrainians have their own native language– Ukrainian. No one denied the existence of obvious differences between Ukrainian and Great Russian speech in the 19th century. At the same time, some Russian linguists called Ukrainian speech independent language, and others, fearing the oppression of tsarist despotism, helpfully called it the dialect of the “Russian language” on a par with Great Russian. Until the second quarter of the 20th century, all Ukrainians spoke Ukrainian. However, as a result of forced training in Russian, practiced in Ukrainian schools and universities under the Soviet regime, over time many Ukrainians began to speak Russian. Nowadays there is linguistic diversity in Ukraine - the country's residents speak Ukrainian, Russian, both languages, or Surzhik. During centuries of development Ukrainian language it was influenced by other languages, but the influence of Polish was not strong. After all, the Dnieper dialect, which became the basis of literary Ukrainian in the mid-19th century, is widespread on both sides of the Dnieper, although the lands west of this river were part of Poland for 224 years, and to the east for only 85 years.

4. Ukrainians have a rich and distinctive ethnic culture. Their anthroponymy, oral folk art, music, dance, types of housing, visual arts, cuisine, National Costume, rituals and customs are noticeably different from Russians. For example, Ukrainian settlements are characterized by landscaping with green spaces and huts with a thatched roof, adobe floor, whitewashed inside and out, in which the stove was often painted with flowers. Ukrainian songs are distinguished by spontaneity and cheerfulness - they reflect the heroism, optimism and humor of the people. For Russians, poorly maintained courtyards and black log huts with wooden floors are typical, creating a depressing impression. And folk songs are distinguished by their chanting, imbued with lyricism and often evoke despondency. And although in the current post-industrial era, elements of ethnic culture are weakly manifested in people’s lives and are almost completely replaced by elements of regional culture (in this case, European), their presence is intended to confirm the different ethnic origins of Ukrainians and Russians.

5. Ukrainians are significantly different in genes from Russians. The diagram shows the genetic distance between different peoples: by autosomal SNP markers (sector A), by Y-DNA (sector B) and by mtDNA (sector C). It turns out that according to the distribution of autosomal markers, which is associated with the distribution of anthropological elements, Ukrainians are closer to Poles, Slovaks and Croats than to northern and central Russians. According to Y-DNA data, which better shows later migrants, Ukrainians are close to southern and slightly central Russians, but far from northern ones, and in general Ukrainians are more similar to Slovaks and Slovenes. According to mtDNA data, it better reflects ancient population, some Russian populations are close to Ukrainians, while others are far from them and are further away than Latvians and Czechs. It should be noted that in all three sectors there is a very large diversity of Russians, who, according to genetic studies, do not resemble a single people. In contrast, Ukrainians are a very homogeneous ethnic group, genetically close only to southern Russians, since they were formed with the participation of Ukrainians.

6. There are significant anthropological differences between Ukrainians and Russians. Anthropologists in the Republic of Ingushetia, then in the USSR, spoke about this, as well as foreigners who noted a noticeable difference in the physical appearance of the two peoples. For example, the Soviet anthropologist T. Alekseeva classified Ukrainians as one group of populations – the Dnieper-Carpathian one. This group also includes Czechs and Slovaks. And T. Alekseeva classified Russians as belonging to two completely different groups of populations - the White Sea-Baltic and Eastern European. These groups also include Vepsians, Mishar Tatars and Udmurts. From a comprehensive comparison anthropological characteristics Ukrainians and Russians become aware that the latter are shorter, have narrower heads, lighter hair and eyes, the fold of the upper eyelid is more developed, the nose is shorter and more often snub-nosed, hair growth on the face and body is weaker, the horizontal profile of the face is weaker due to increased protrusion of the cheekbones . This is due to the fact that Ukrainians have more southern anthropological elements, and Russians have more northern, Ural and Mongoloid elements.

7. Ukrainians have a special character. Due to the more southern genotype, relatively warm climate with a predominance of clear or partly cloudy weather and other reasons, they are characterized by a high temperament, an open and cheerful disposition. Ukrainians make decisions quickly, are not afraid to protest against the authorities and defend their interests. For Russians, things are different, since due to a more northern genotype, a relatively cold climate with frequent cloudy weather, etc., they are characterized by a low temperament, a secretive and gloomy character. They make decisions slowly, are fearful of their power and superiors - they consider speaking out against the government as a feat that few Russians are capable of. However, Russians are capable of being loud and cheeky, but this usually happens after drinking alcoholic beverages.

8. Ukrainians can rightly be called Christian people. And no matter how much the Russians boast of their unknown spirituality, a minority of them are Christians, even taking into account the new-fangled obscurantists who have distorted the teaching and turned religion into a militant heretical cult. The CIA claims that in Ukraine Christians make up more than half of the population, among whom Orthodox Christians predominate (2013), while in the Russian Federation there are only 15-20% Orthodox Christians and 2% other Christians (2006). Sociological surveys conducted in the Russian Federation and reporting that the majority of residents consider themselves Orthodox Christians raise doubts, because many of the people surveyed are formal believers who do not really know the meaning of Christianity, do not live according to its instructions and are ready to laugh at any joke on religious theme. According to the Ministry of Internal Affairs of Ukraine, Easter services in 2009 were attended by 10.4 million people (23% of the population). And according to the Ministry of Internal Affairs of the Russian Federation, 4.5 million people (3% of the population) took part in Easter services in 2009. It turns out that Ukrainians are more Orthodox than Russians. And this is not surprising, since the Russians were the people who built the most anti-Christian state in history.

9. Ukrainians are less prone to bad habits than the Russians. After all, in Ukraine there is less alcohol consumption in liters of pure ethanol per capita (aged 15 years and older) per year - 13.9 (2010) versus 15.1 in the Russian Federation (2010). Probably, the use of moonshine and surrogate alcohol, like “Hawthorn” and cologne, which are widespread in the Russian Federation, were not taken into account here. Otherwise, the difference between the level of alcoholism in Ukraine and the Russian Federation would be even more significant. In addition, in Ukraine, fewer cigarettes are consumed per capita (aged 15 years and older) per year - 1854 (2014) versus 2690 in the Russian Federation (2014). And thanks to a greater desire to lead healthy image Life in Ukraine also has a lower percentage of obese people and higher life expectancy than in the Russian Federation.

10. Ukrainians are less cruel and bloodthirsty than Russians. After all, intentional murders are committed less often in Ukraine – 4.3 per 100,000 inhabitants (2013) versus 9.2 in the Russian Federation (2013). During the war in the Ukrainian Donbass, inspired by the Russian Federation, several times fewer civilians died than during the first and second Chechen wars. Moreover, the Ukrainians did not convert settlements Donbass in ruins. In turn, the Russians cleared and razed Chechen villages and cities, especially Grozny. What crimes the Russian military is capable of was once again demonstrated during the war in Syria, when Russian troops killed civilians in droves and managed to reduce eastern Aleppo to piles of rubble. In addition, Ukrainians are less susceptible to spiritual decline than Russians. Ukraine has a lower suicide rate - 16.8 per 100,000 inhabitants (2012) versus 19.5 in the Russian Federation (2012).

11. Ukrainians rarely lie, unlike Russians. The latter achieved special skill in this matter and became famous throughout the Western world. Russian government with well-fed propagandists, they deceive and manipulate the opinion of the population of the Russian Federation. Russian President, officials and parliamentarians deceive other countries in official speeches. There were so many Russian lies that caring people had to create the “Anti-Zombie” project and websites initially aimed at combating Russian disinformation, and a little later in Western countries they also began taking measures to protect against the flow of heresy coming from the Russian Federation.

12. Corrupt love is less developed in Ukraine. According to data from the Ukrainian Institute of Social Research for 2011, 50 thousand women in the country were engaged in prostitution (0.1% of the population). According to the Ministry of Internal Affairs for 2012, there were about 1 million prostitutes in the Russian Federation (0.7% of the population) or, according to the Chairman of the Constitutional Court V. Zorkin for 2007, even more - 4.5 million prostitutes (3.2% of the population ). According to this point, as well as points 8-11, it turns out that the moral character of Ukrainians is higher than that of Russians.

13. Ukrainians choose democracy. But Russians, on the contrary, want a dictatorship - for them, the tougher the regime, the better, even to the point of totalitarianism. Russians always need a master, a master, a tyrant who will keep them under a tight rein, push around the population of the country, decide important issues for them and take responsibility. In contrast, Ukrainians prefer to live in a free state governed by the people, where there is equal rights for citizens, protection of their rights and freedoms, the rule of law, separation of powers, and the election of the president and parliament. Therefore, it is not surprising that according to the democracy index for 2016, Ukraine is in 86th place, while the Russian Federation is in 134th, and according to the press freedom index for 2017, Ukraine is in 102nd place, while the Russian Federation is stuck at 148th.

14. Ukrainians are true patriots, they value their homeland and do not strive to take over someone else’s property. Ukrainians are building up their country, making it more beautiful and more comfortable to live in; over the past 26 years of independence they have not attacked anyone. Among Russians, patriotism is of an ostentatious nature, directed outward, when, instead of really working on themselves, they boast about imaginary achievements and try to look important and formidable in front of the rest of the world. Russians do not value their homeland and have no desire to make it better - to clean it of dirt, overcome devastation, and reduce corruption. As a result, the despondency and hopelessness of life in the Russian Federation, together with the thirst for easy money, push them to seize foreign, not yet neglected territories, or at least to move abroad forever, where they could “love their homeland” from a distance. Over the past 26 years, the Russians have constantly interfered in the affairs of other countries, made demands, incited hostility, attacked Georgia twice (covertly in 1992 and openly in 2008) and once against Ukraine (covertly in 2014).

15. Ukrainians are moderate political views and looking to the future. They want to see Ukraine as a rich and free European country - other reasonable nations strive for a similar ideal. And Russians constantly rush between extremes - they are thrown either into communism, then into monarchism, nationalism or fascism. They really like Ivan IV, Lenin and Dzhugashvili, Russians see the ideal of the country in the past - in the image of the Republic of Ingushetia or the USSR. Therefore, they believe in various historical myths about a prosperous life under emperors and general secretaries. But when Russians extol the past at the expense of the present, they acquire the characteristics of an aging ethnic group that has little chance of achieving normal life in future.

Anthropological studies of Ukrainians began in the 60s XIX century. This issue was studied most thoroughly at the turn of the 19th and 20th centuries by the outstanding Ukrainian anthropologist and ethnographer, professor of the Russian and Paris Academies of Sciences H. Volk. Special attention he paid attention to the differences between Ukrainians and others Slavic peoples.

Thus, he wrote that people from Ukraine are mostly dark-haired and dark-eyed, while Russians, Belarusians and Poles are predominantly fair-haired and light-eyed. Russians and Belarusians have longer skulls than Ukrainians. According to anthropological terminology, Russians and Belarusians belong to long-headed peoples, Ukrainians belong to round-headed peoples. If Russians have more frequent wide face and cheekbones, then among Ukrainians there are more narrow-faced people. Their noses are often straight. The so-called concave nose, according to Volk, is found in Volyn, in the east and north of Ukraine, which is explained by the admixture of Russian, Belarusian and Polish blood. A curved (eagle) nose is usually found among residents of southeastern Ukraine and, according to the scientist, is the result of connections with Iranian tribes.

The arm length of Ukrainians is average - less than that of Russians and Belarusians and slightly longer than that of the Balkan Slavs. But the length of the legs is much longer than that of Russians. H. Volk’s colleague A. Ivanovsky writes that Ukrainians belong to the group of the most “long-legged” tribes. Researchers of the past classified Ukrainians as tall peoples, and Russians, Belarusians and Poles as short peoples.

Recent genetic studies have confirmed that the Aryan-Slavic male haplogroup R1a is more common among Russians than among residents of Ukraine. At the same time, female haplogroups among Russians are completely Slavic and correspond to the same haplogroups of Poles.

The National Anti-Corruption Bureau and the prosecutor's office of the Square are seriously investigating who is to blame for the fact that the Great Ukrainian Wall, designed to protect Nenka and the entire European Union from the Katsap horde, in fact turned out to be a pathetic country fence made of wire mesh. It turns out that tenders for the construction of the wall were held dishonestly, and more than 100 million hryvnia were stolen. However, the fate of the “European Defense Line” was clear immediately as soon as the shovels of the “volunteers” building it stuck into the ground at the border.

A Ukrainian, according to Ukrainian propaganda, is a person with a seriously low mental level. Both the actor who is starring in the next episode of the “soap opera” about heroic police officers, and the consumer who is being pushed this bullshit. The idea of building trenches, ditches, walls and other things is a primitive plagiarism from propaganda from the times of industrialization and partly from Germany during the Second World War.

However, it’s impossible to take an excavator and stupidly dig a ditch in an hour that three dozen weak-minded flash mob participants will dig for a couple of days. Firstly, an excavator costs money, but a Ukrainian “embroidery” is free. Moreover, you can collect money from it for a ditch, but the excavator will also have to be filled with diesel fuel (the excavator operator will have to be filled with vodka).

Secondly, such mechanization completely kills national idea permanent victory. How can you “get over it” when a smart machine works for you in the field? Combat robots the Kremlin, and the outlying “shchenevmerliks” have only ardent faith, a cute trident and two-color rags. At one time, the blogger Ovanes asked the question of the difference between Ukrainians and Russians. From the point of view of the Armenian Hovhannes, the differences are generally minimal, if any. And I understand him. For me, for example, it is not easy to find differences between a Bulgarian and a Macedonian, although they are, as it were, Slavs, and I had the opportunity to observe both of them, but still. And the difference between the Bavarians and the residents of Salzburg, in my opinion, is elusively small. But it is there. Ukrainians have spent a quarter of a century proving that they are not Russians, and now this can be seen with the naked eye. Although we are still talking about, rather, intraspecific differences (for now).

So, what do I think accounts for the difference?

1. The dominant feature of Russian behavior is not greed. That is, it can be anything - stupid redneck (when you have to pay, and he understands, but is lazy), bastardism, stinginess, but all this is not a dominant trait. Russians don't like greedy rednecks, and rednecks are publicly condemned. A typical “Maidan” Ukrainian is a natural redneck and greedy person. Not because he is bad, but because this is the dominant of his behavior, which varies from a simply “overly zealous” farmer from the “small region” to a person with mental disorders. That is, someone who has gone crazy with greed, and who is easily hooked by that same greed.

The greed of “real” Ukrainians goes all the way, they don’t know how to stop. But blaming Ukrainians for greed is useless. In 99% of cases they won’t even understand what we’re talking about.

I have been following the “Ukrainian crisis” for three years now, and the most amazing and funny thing is how in Ukraine they shove in everyone’s faces endless “gifts”, “help”, “sms” and other props from the provincial theater, designed to demonstrate certain voluntary “donations” and the extraordinary breadth of soul of the working people, generously throwing their earned pennies into the common pot with calloused hands. That is, please understand correctly - in Russia everyone already knows what crowdfunding is, everyone is aware that Navalny, Katz, etc. figures regularly “collect” “donations” on the Internet, and even often post reports. But even they did not reach the insanity of magic with pulling out tens of thousands of dollars from magic boxes.

But on the “Maidan”, TV viewers were proudly shown sandwiches with lard and homemade pickles, which were brought by the hardworking “Maidan grandmothers”, and in the next tent sat cheerful managers, busy counting “voluntary donations”: from 30 to 100 thousand dollars were raked out of the bedside table per day (!) Absolutely public donations. So what? The whole nation stood up in unison and financed the overthrow of the bloody tyrant Yanukovych with pennies of labor. Whoever does not believe is a slave of the Kremlin, a Muscovite, incapable of broad folk creativity.

In the same style, the propagated greedy and stupid giants “collected” money for body armor, socks, and underpants for their soldiers. Everything is on camera, everything is recorded, everything is a complete victory, on social networks there are joyful likes and wishes to kill, kill and kill again everyone who is a “Colorado” and “agent of the Kremlin.” There is no doubt - it is not difficult to sign a greedy person to buy a pair of socks for brave ukrovoyaks or an SMS for 5 hryvnia (but only once).

True, from time to time, in the midst of patriotic psychosis, a glitch occurs, and it suddenly turns out that the money and financial aid “collected by the people” have disappeared somewhere. Or they didn’t come there at all. The Ministry of Defense of Ukraine in the first year of the so-called. “ATO” collected 128 million hryvnia, but Ukrainian soldiers ate moldy bread, some garbage happened to the “Heavenly Hundred” charitable foundation... And the Ukrainian state itself demonstrates miracles of enchanting redneckness when they refuse to pay the families of soldiers killed in “ATO” benefits, when the families of the deceased participants of the much-hyped “Heavenly Hundred” have to literally hold rallies in Kiev, and so on. Why is this happening? Because today's Ukrainians do not understand how the state should function.

It seems to them that they need to collect “gifts”, and then “victory” will come. Whereas nothing will happen except yet another theft of no one’s money and valuables. For the natural redneck, the state is a way to quickly and sharply take away “goodies.” "Havchik" was served and nothing more. Where do you think the Ukrainian warrant general officers put the money collected by the suckers?

Natural, enchanting theft and redneck in Ukraine are charming. Take and steal money from the “fund”. Without leaving the cash register and amidst roars about “agents of the global Jewish-Muscovite conspiracy.” Do you think all these twists and turns are a mystery to observant people? Not at all. This is the norm for Ukraine. Let me remind you how typical example that in 2006 Ukrainian “rednecks” good will“led by President Yushchenko and his wife (!), they started collecting 120 million dollars from workers into a specially created fund for the construction of a super-duper hospital in Kyiv. The money seemed to have been collected by 2010, and then - correctly, they guessed - the financial assets naturally evaporated, the hospital was never built. Who is guilty? Muscovites.

That is, no one considers stealing shameful in Ukraine - from the centurion (now deputy) Parasyuk to the president. It would seem that after the “Maidan” a new, “people’s” government came, a “bloody tyrant” and the corrupt official Yanukovych fled to Mordor in Moscow. There were even lustration committees established in each region. So what are the results? Again, just theft of natural greedy people.

2. Infantilism. Total and universal joyful infantilism. A Ukrainian is a person who is unable to articulate his social interests then the grab (that is, the simplest redneck reaction).

Oil painting. The Black Sea city lives on tourism; its share of tourist traffic is Russian tourists- at 60-70%, in the city... that’s right, they hold “liberation” marches with cries of “Muscovites to knives.” Then they burn tires, then their own compatriots and... they wonder why the damned Muscovites don’t go to the city... to rest. Hotel owners, business owners, restaurant owners are surprised - they say, it’s all their fault Russian television. This is a completely honest surprise - from the Ukrainian point of view, the Muscovites deliberately did this in order to spoil the “Tripoli democrats”. And the fact that such excesses are unacceptable at resorts and tourist places is known even to Arabs and African blacks, but not to Ukrainians.

Another example. There was a market in Kharkov that worked for Russia. One of the activists of the local dull “Euromaidan” is one of the local businessmen. The man joyfully jumped on the spot for six months, celebrating his “victory” and cursing the Muscovites, and then it turned out that the business was naturally closed. Who is guilty? All the same Muscovites. And this typical “Maidan” Ukrainian doesn’t even understand that he’s an idiot.

The “Svidomo” Ukrainian has no need for reflection, which is inherent in Russians. He already has ready-made answers to all questions, and there are only two of these answers: “what’s wrong” and “the Muscovites are to blame.” The gap between reality and the world of stupid and cruel infantiles reaches depth Mariana Trench. People joyfully hosted in one of the key regions civil war and demand... more murders. And after they win, they plan... They don’t plan anything.

3. Stubbornness, reaching the point of obstinacy. The Ukrainian is convinced that around “Nenka” there are people who envy the Ukrainians. First of all, greedy, stupid, poor Muscovites (that’s what they say - “poor Russians”). And the fact that the per capita GDP in Russia is almost three times higher than in Ukraine, the fact that “workers” from Kiev go to Moscow, and not vice versa, is nonsense. You say that 3-4 million Ukrainian migrant workers and prostitutes are constantly working in the Russian Federation? Lies. And if there is, that’s where they go.

The Ukrainian will talk with enthusiasm about how China (in retaliation for “ Ukrainian Crimea"!) will take over Siberia, just as Russia was depopulated Far East. But he will never ask where almost a third of the working-age population fled from “Nezalezhnaya” in 20 years of “complete victory”, and why the population fell from 53 to 38-40 million people. I have already written about the phenomenon of Ukrainian bloggers who are fighting tirelessly against Putin, but are stubbornly silent about the monstrous social and demographic catastrophe in Ukraine, where the natural mortality rate of 100-120 thousand people a year is considered “not bad”, and the country is simply dying out and scattering . There are no problems, “Ridna Ukraine” is blooming and heading, and we’ll rip out your bushes, katsap.

They are not interested. It was the Russians who created the “it’s time to get out” community, where psychopaths and neurotics heal each other. Moreover, in Europe our compatriots are adequately perceived as solvent clients, while Ukrainians visiting on a “visa-free” basis there are basically just guest workers and prostitutes. But this is not enough for Russian fools, they need to be... “loved”! Deoxidation is the other side of Ukrainian stubbornness, if that makes sense.

4. Wrestling. The Ukrainian is sharpened to the state of a “natural fighter”. That is why Ukrainians are profitable and natural bio-clickers, extras for liking and SEO-krill. But the “struggle” is going successfully only for the reason that the “adversaries” do not know about this “struggle,” as is easy to guess. For example, most Russians are not aware of how desperately the Ukrainians are fighting them, and what an unforgettable number of “victories” they have already won. Most Russians, at worst, consider the “Svidomo” Ukrainians to be a related species of cubanoids. Whereas practice shows that these are just robotic excavators, drums according to Galkovsky. People have a program in their heads, there is a small processor that shows where to move, where to press. Cyborgs.

How to use such wealth? They gave me the task, accepted the job, and paid me. That's it, goodbye. "Rich" inner world No one is interested in dramas. Talking to a food processor? This is for a psychiatrist. Two or three typical reactions of a “Svidomite” are simulated once or twice (stupid and stubborn lies, “what’s wrong”, “Muscovites are to blame”), then you can not pay attention at all. The biggest mistake is to conduct some kind of joint business, etc., with “robo-people”. I laughed when I read how the naive nationalist Prosvirnin once went to Kyiv to launch a version of his resource there in partnership. Idiot. However, the majority of Russians who sympathize with the inhabitants of the Square are just such beautiful-hearted idiots. Those who live in Ukraine and hope for something are cubed idiots.

By the way, the population of Ukraine is historically half Russian, and for a quarter of a century the Vuyks have not really managed to Ukrainize the country. And what? On social networks and forums there are calls from Ukrainians... to Ukrainize Ukraine. Moreover, all this is often written and spoken in... Russian. Contradiction? Yes, there is none. People don’t even play, but live in Tolkien.

All of the above is, of course, evil anti-Ukrainian propaganda, for which the author was generously paid crazy money by the Kremlin (500 hryvnia)…

We often hear that the Russian and Ukrainian nations both belong to the group of Slavic peoples. But is this really so? Even judging by the appearance of Russians and Ukrainians, not everything looks so simple...

Slavs or Turks?

Is it possible to distinguish a Russian from a Ukrainian at first glance? Of course not. Both have a lot of blood mixed in them. But still some general patterns it is possible to highlight.

It is undeniable that both Russians and Ukrainians belong to the white race. At the same time, in the central zone of Russia the following phenotype predominates: average height, average build, bright skin, light (gray or blue) eyes, light brown color hair. The closer to the Urals, the more common the Mongoloid eye shape is.

Now look at the Ukrainians. The further east you go, the more people of the Slavic phenotype are found - short stature, heavy build, fair skin, eyes and hair. The further west you go, the more Ukrainians you come across with relatively dark skin, dark eyes and hair.

All this is explained by historical and geographical features. Thus, in those Russian regions that were actively subject to raids by the Mongol-Tatars, where Tatars, Kazakhs, Bashkirs, Kyrgyz, Kalmyks, Yakuts live next to the Russians, the Mongoloid phenotype is much more common. Ukraine suffered from raids in to a greater extent than Rus', and it was not without reason that it received such a name, being a “marginal” territory bordering Hungary, Romania, Moldova, and Turkey. Some researchers believe that Ukrainians are much closer to Turkic peoples than the Russians.

Scientific research

Anthropological studies of Ukrainians began in the 60s of the 19th century. This issue was studied most thoroughly at the turn of the 19th and 20th centuries by the outstanding Ukrainian anthropologist and ethnographer, professor of the Russian and Paris Academies of Sciences H. Volk. He paid special attention to the differences between Ukrainians and other Slavic peoples.

Thus, he wrote that people from Ukraine are mostly dark-haired and dark-eyed, while Russians, Belarusians and Poles are predominantly fair-haired and light-eyed. Russians and Belarusians have longer skulls than Ukrainians. According to anthropological terminology, Russians and Belarusians belong to long-headed peoples, Ukrainians belong to round-headed peoples. If Russians more often have wide faces and cheekbones, then among Ukrainians there are more narrow faces. Their noses are often straight. The so-called concave nose, according to Volk, is found in Volyn, in the east and north of Ukraine, which is explained by the admixture of Russian, Belarusian and Polish blood. A curved (eagle) nose is usually found among residents of southeastern Ukraine and, according to the scientist, is the result of connections with Iranian tribes.

Do Ukrainians come from the Balkans?

Nowadays, many anthropologists and geneticists have come to the conclusion that today's Western Ukrainians belong to the circle of “Balkan” populations. Their ancestors originally belonged to the Thracian ethno-linguistic group and migrated to the territory of modern Ukraine, most likely from the territory of modern Romania. From an anthropological point of view, Ukrainians belong to the so-called Alpine race, while the Northern Slavs, including Russians, belong to the Baltic and Nordic. Another classification places Ukrainians in the Dnieper-Carpathian group of populations, which also includes Slovaks, partly Czechs, Serbs, Croats, as well as southern, central and eastern Hungarians. Probably, many will agree that typical Hungarians are not like typical Russians. But among Ukrainians there are many who are similar to Hungarians. They are closer to the southern and Western Slavs than to the east.

So it cannot be said that Russians and Ukrainians are the same (at least from the point of view of anthropology and genetics).