Jump to content

Talk:Mongol invasion of Kievan Rus'

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by 70.60.254.11 (talk) at 21:50, 22 January 2016 (→Inconsistent terminology: new section). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

There was no Russia back in those times

Use of term Russia is anachronism and in some places it's used even in place when it should be used term Rus. Rus is not Russia. Remember. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 195.150.224.69 (talk) 14:31, 15 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Really?

A significant number of historians consider the oppression of Rus' by the Mongols to be the major cause of what is sometimes called "the East-West gap" - approximately 200 years delay in introducing major social, political and economical reforms and scientific innovations in Russia compared to Western Europe. Specifically, the isolation from the West may have caused Russia's later non-involvement in the Renaissance, the Protestant Reformation, and failure to develop a middle class.

I doubt that you can call the share of historians who believe this significant. Also, the term 'delay' seems teleological and if you want to talk about this, was it not Orthodoxy with its Scripture in vernacular that cut off the Rus' lands off the Latin-speaking European countries? The Mongol invasion did cut off the Rus' from the Byzantine empire though. 83.83.1.229 (talk) 20:33, 26 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

You're welcome to introduce a section on alternative theories/interpretations or a criticism section provided your information is not based on fringe theories and is well cited using verifiable secondary sources which meet the criteria for being reliable. Wikipedia is an encyclopaedic resource and adheres strictly to policies of maintaining a neutral POV and no original research. Dependent on what you qualify as being 'a significant number of historians' (sic), introducing your wishlist to the article may or may not be acceptable as we avoid giving undue weight to spurious and non-mainstream theories. That being said (and given the constraints), I'd certainly encourage you to expand the article. Cheers! --Iryna Harpy (talk) 23:11, 27 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The problem here is that the east-west gap is borderline a fringe theory. Countries on the border of Russia which were equally invaded by the mongols had most or part of these things. The protestant reformation failed in most of western Europe, and had a presence in areas under the eastern part of the so-called gap. The renaissance, while it didn't involve Russia, did involve most of the Mediterranean, including the ottoman empire. It sounds mostly like weird germano (this term here includes the english) centric historiography of the Weberian kind. The renaissance, for one, started in Italy, nowhere near the protestant reformation, at a time when the mongol invasions were still going on. The country where the reformation was strongest missed most of it, or even almost all of it in the case of England and Scandinavia. 216.252.76.126 (talk) 00:50, 13 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

You do realize that the initial poster here was disagreeing with WHAT IS ALREADY in the article - the first half of their post is a quote from the article. Since consensus seems to regard that content is fringe, I'll remove it from the article.--¿3family6 contribs 01:41, 13 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted content: "A significant number of historians consider the oppression of Rus' by the Mongols to be the major cause of what is sometimes called "the East-West gap" - approximately 200 years delay in introducing major social, political and economical reforms and scientific innovations in Russia compared to Western Europe. Specifically, the isolation from the West may have caused Russia's later non-involvement in the Renaissance, the Protestant Reformation, and failure to develop a middle class.[1]"

I'm archiving the above material here.--¿3family6 contribs 01:41, 13 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Cheers for picking up on that, ¿3fam. I dropped the ball on the fact that the first IP was quoting from the article and thought they wanted to add spurious content. I'd certainly want to see more than one citation in order to establish that there actually are 'some' scholars. There are, in fact, a large number of factors (namely the vastness of the territory) preventing the building of a comprehensive transport infrastructure which could accommodate the needs of a burgeoning industrial sector (industrial revolution); the majority of the population being rural inhabitants and, consequently, a lesser social impact resulting from the plague/s (persistence of serfdom); etc. Mongol yoke as a major cause? Nope, never encountered that in mainstream historical analysis. --Iryna Harpy (talk) 23:33, 14 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I know that the above discussion is over a year old, but I just want to bring up that the discussion of an East-West gap looks even more absurd when you consider that Russia was one of the first countries after Italy to embrace the Renaissance.--3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 16:31, 12 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Killed in action?

Is it a correct use of word for a country? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.171.162.29 (talk) 14:48, 12 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

No.--3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 16:28, 12 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Inconsistent terminology

In this article we have the name of the nation written as: Rus', Rusaa', Rusa', Ruas'. Let's get some consistency up in here, eh?

  1. ^ O'Neill, Patrick H. (2006). Cases in Comparative Politics. New York: Norton. pp. 197–198. ISBN 978-0-393-92943-0. {{cite book}}: Unknown parameter |coauthors= ignored (|author= suggested) (help)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Mongol_invasion_of_Kievan_Rus%27&oldid=701163164"