Video

Kiitos palautteesta. Olen tietoinen, että puheeni on varsin nopeaa, mutta koitan jatkuvasti tehdä töitä sen eteen. Uudemmissa videoissani olen jo mielestäni jo kehittynyt puheni selkeydessä, vaikka harjoittelen vieläkin. Usko älä, tämänkin videon kerronta on hitaampaa ja selkempää kuin normaali puheeni 😄 Videossa on kuitenkin tekstitykset, joiden pitäisi auttaa ymmärtämistä.

Monenlaista projektia tekeillä, osa niistä Turkuakin koskevia. Aikatauluista tosin on mahdotonta sanoa yhtään mitään 😄

@@tepponieminen ok kiitos tiedosta

Ahvenanmaailaiset ovat seksuaalivammaisia torakoita

Naturally, it is hard to determine with complete certainty a chain of events which took place over a 1000 years ago with little to none literally record. It is not hard to argue for any of the Finnic language speakers, that they were the ones who took the Rus and their name to Kiev, or that the origin of the name lies somewhere not mentioned here. I admit that I might simplify and speculate a little too much here, but that's why I also try to list my sources :)

​@@tepponieminen nah you're good, I like the vid. It's just the subject of the early history of Russia is something I'm interested in and something I did a bit of research on, cause I'm russian myself. Just now I watched the vid with subtitles and without having a slightest inclination of sounding arrogant or criticizing your work, I do want to point out a few other things I believe are not entirely accurate. First your idea that Vikings were looking for 'new lands and riches', did some trading on the eastern route, travelled to Kiev and then decided to "take city as theirs", founding Kievan Rus. Now 'looking for new lands and riches' is spot on and it's true indeed that Vikings modus operandi in many cases was to come first as traders, that way they could gather intelligence and besides actually do some trading. However their main thing, the one they became famous/infamous for all across Europe, is the one which came after the period of trading or without the period of trading at all - armed raids and armed conquest, 'taking cities as their own'. According to Primary Chronicle (PC), Russia was founded in 862, long story short - Vikings were collecting tribute (which suggests conquest already) from different slavic/finnic tribes (states), these states eventually rebelled, defeated Vikings, but then started fighting among each other and to bring peace decided in 862 to willingly invite Vikings (now called Rus) back so that the latter rule over them all. Interestingly in this exact time slot, in 865, Britons also took nordic 'guests from overseas', their Chronicle called them 'Great Heathen Army', you can check Wiki on them. Back to Russia - I have strong doubts about the 'defeat/invitation' part of PC story, but in any case in 862 Vikings-Rus took over Novgorod, which became first capital of Rus and is now recognized as the first capital of Russia. Archeological evidence suggests their first capital was actually higher upstream - Ladoga - but it's not mentioned in PC. It was probably their tribute-collection base before they were invited/invited themselves to Novgorod. About 20 years later they sailed southward, captured a bunch of cities, like Smolensk, finally arrived at Kiev, which already seemed to have Viking rulers (Askold and Dir), and captured it (PC says they disguised themselves as traders, duped Kiev rulers to come meet them ("come, meet your kinfolk"), and killed them once they did). From that point they moved the capital to Kiev. 'Kievan Rus' is the term which was created by historians much later, it doesn't appear in PC or any other historic document. There was Rus, which now had new capital. And from then on it was pretty much conquest after conquest, so that by 20th century Russia had more land than any other country, which is true to this day. So for this reason I disagree when you say how modern Russia shares very little with it's Viking past. Rather it's modern day lgbt-friendly Sweden, which for a change invites people from faraway lands to come, settle, and use Sweden's wealth, which have little to do with it's Viking past. For good or bad. Russia however is still somewhat a warlike state, a major military power, which has plenty of land and which recently sent let's say quite a bit of vibes across Europe. Remind you of anything? )

Lappeenrannan kaupungin mukaan villimiehellä on monia mahdollisia juuria, vaikka Kristiinan perustelut sen valinnalle eivät ole tiedossa. Lyhyt ja tönkösti yksinkertaistettu tiivistelmä: Villimies on heraldiikassa hahmo, joka voidaan yhdistää antiikin sankareihin, kuten Herkulekseen. Tämä olisu sitten Ruotsin hovissa yhdistetty Lappeenrannan perustamisdokumentteja tehdessä alueella kiertelviin 'villeihin lappalaisiin' eli saamelaisiin. Toisaalta myös Mannerheim-suvun vaakunassa on villimiehiä, joten voi olla, että se toivoi tai symbolisoi Lappeenrannalle vain rohkeutta.

Jomalassa asunutta tuttuani lainaten: "Ei se sen pahempaa ole kuin olla turkulaisena Helsingissä." 😄

Toi on joku myytti

I'll at least try to give it my best 😅 It's a pride thing :)

Katsotaan, satunko joskus käymään Sammallahdenmäellä ;)

Kiitos vinkistä. Saattaa olla, että jos löydän aikaa, niin teen Emovahasta lyhyen lisävideon tähän :)

Miksi Ruotsille pitäisi taas tarjota suotuisia diilejä ja ilmaisia resursseja? Idiootit!