Since It Somehow Became A Problem And I See That Not Everyone Aware Or That Fact That Ukrainians Were

Since it somehow became a problem and I see that not everyone aware or that fact that Ukrainians were called русини (Ruthenians) until XX century, I will live here some sources:

For Ukrainians

Article on the website of the Institute of History of Ukraine of the National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine

Book from National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine, Institute of art studies, folkloristics and ethnology of M. T. Rylskyi

Wikipedia for the laziest ones (you can read the sources below the page)

For non-Ukrainians, eng source

Canadian Institute of Ukrainian Studies's article

Also for both: I still recommend Beauplan and Merimee, because they lived trough that times.

So, what I want to say. Yes, there are modern Ruthenians, which are self-name of an ethnographic group of Ukrainians living on the border of Transcarpathian Ukraine, Slovakia, Poland, as well as in Vojvodina. Because they preserved the ancient self-name of Ukrainians, that is, the people of Kyivan Rus. Until XX century worldwide, Ukrainians were known as Ruthenians, which shows Beauplan's and Merimee's history studies, for example. Nowadays, Ruthenians are an ethnic group of Ukrainians, but not all of us. But in the times of Kyivan Rus' and long after, all Ukrainians were called Ruthenians.

It's not good, it's not bad. It's just... It was history. Besides, it would be incorrect to call Kyivan Rus' people Ukrainians in history-AU because by that time there was no modern name 'Ukraine'. Yes, in fact they were ancestors of Ukrainians, but Ukraine was called (Kyivan) Rus' and at that time natives didn't call themselves Ukrainians. Like many other countries and nationalities changed their names through time. But name doesn't change US. We have history and there is nothing strange that Kyivan Rus' changed its name, it was more than a thousand years since.

Because series made me to think about this canon again

For years, I was confused about how to feel about Armand's book backstory.

Like. He's from Kyivan Rus', BUT at the same time from 15th century. Kyivan Rus' was feudal monarchy that existed from probably IX (at least we assume so, because it was mentioned under that name in 852, tho it's not popped from the air, you know) to 1240. From ~1240 to 1349 the country was Rus' Kingdom. After that, Ukraine was splitted between Poland, Lithuania and Moldavian principality. Tho, Ukrainians were called Ruthenians (Latin name for former nation of Kyivan Rus') up until 19th century. I've read Beauplan's and Merimee's works about Ukraine, and they call Ukrainians both Ukrainians and Ruthenians.

SO.

When was Andrii (yes, this is how you would pronounce Ukrainian variation of Ανδρεας or Andrew)? He was Ruthen from Kyivan Rus' or he was Ruthen from 14th century Rus' Kingdom? Or he was even later? Book says he was born in 1481. So, later. A lot later.

We also know that he was kidnapped and enslaved by Mongolians. Mongolians entered Kyiv in 1240, it was a 13th century, not the end of 15th.

AND I HAVE A THEORIES.

Vampires live very long. So, probably it could be a mistake. Maybe Armand is simply older. Maybe he was around in 1240. He was just a child back then. Probably centuries later he was like 'yeah that Mongolians they sold me... so... it was... um... 15th century... yes? no?' Maybe it's just miscount. And then he never bothered to fix that.

The book is written by Daniel if I remember correctly. Perhaps Armand was like 'dude I was in orthodox Christian church I didn't know what year it was, I almost forgot my name and appearance in the catacombs under Kyiv-Pechersk Lavra'. And Daniel asked Marius when he met Andrii. And Marius... Well, if you are around for 2 thousand years, you can remember things incorrectly. So, Daniel, who is American and know nothing about history of Ukraine, and Marius who maybe knows something about Kyivan Rus' because it was a huge and powerful country back then just made that. They counted and assumed that it was 1481. And it was wrong.

Armand is a liar. How we can know that his real name is Andrii? Maybe he had a friend who's name was Andrii and Armand stole it. Maybe he was Taras. Or Bohdan. Or Oleh. How we would know? And maybe he never saw Mongols. How we would know? How would Daniel know? Maybe it was just his grand grandmother who told she saw Mongolians and how they burnt Kyiv. And little Andrii (we can say he was a weirdo all along) was just 'wow I want that! how cool it would be!'. And then he was kidnapped. And assaulted. And sold as a slave. And little weird Andrii just wanted a little comfort in his misery and a cool story. And when Marius asked how Andrii was captured, he made up this cool story about Mongols. Maybe in reality it was something more... Common. Dark and common. Everything could happen. Maybe he was sold by his parents, and he denied it. Maybe it was abuse in that church. Maybe he ran away from church and somehow ended up on the slave market.

Actually, I tend to 3rd. Isn't it a western movie where little talented boy paint so beautifully that Prince Michael (Mykhailo II of Chernihiv I assume) orders one of his icons, but on the way he and his father are interrupted by Mongolians. Also, it was said that Andrii suffered an amnesia due to his trauma caused by life in a brothel. He even starts to learn how to paint from the start, like he never knew how to paint before. So, was he at Lavra at all? Was he an icon painter? We would never know. He could just go to the Kyiv-Pechersk Lavra, point at some old icon and say he drew it.

Or maybe some part of the story is true and some - isn't. I would speculate that Armand had an education. He wasn't a son of a hunter, no. He knew about Mongols. He knew who was the knyaz in 1240. But in 1481 Yurii Paz was knyaz. Mykhailo would be long dead by that time, obviously. So, how would little poor Andrii Ivanovych from 1481 know who was knyaz back when Mongols burnt Kyiv?)) A hunters son could not, he would not have an education, he would not know how to read or write, so history? Oh no, no way.

So, simply, we do not know who is Andrii. Is he Andrii at all? Was he born in 1481? Was he even 17 when Marius was thinking he was? Was his father a hunter named Ivan? Was he an icon painter at Lavra? probably yes and Ann Rice just didn't research enough

I just was thinking about it for years since I have read Vampire Armand. All these years I was wondering how he end up stolen by Mongols in 15th century...

Tho, it would be hilarious to see Armand's icon in Vampireverse Lavra. Imagine that. By the way, Lavra still have catacombs (I was there on tour). Maybe in Vampireverse some of Andrii's friends are there. Literally, their mummies as saints. He would arrive in Ukraine, in Kyiv and like 'oooh let's go see my old friends'. 'Look, Daniel, this is Marko, I knew him. Oh, and this is Illya, he looks better now, actually'. And then he would see his icon. And like... You know how it feels to see your artwork after some time. It's just not that good anymore, you know. You can do better now. Yes, this is how he would feel. It was a masterpiece in 1490s, he painted it for a year and a half. And now he can draw photo-like detailed art on his graphics tablet.

If you read this, thank you for the attention! Love you!