Dr. Roy Casagranda is a man that makes you not just love history but makes you connect all the dots, a true jem. and the way he explains it is simple yet so excellent that you never get bored. thank you guys, thank you dr for all the lectures.
@@viorica8402 Interesting because the jews were bankers for the normans. The catholic church was created by the jews and at least 4-5 popes were jewish. The jews set out to conquer the anglo saxons and subjugate them to a raceless ethic.
@@TheMunchkinita2509 Everyone who listen to this professor and believe what he say are simple minded. Nothing he say is true. He just mix different things, events and people togheter, he use lies and deception to make it look like Islam is true and to make Muslims look smart. And he try to promote Arabic culture. But he fail everytime. He only fool Muslims, they are already indoctrinated and they only learn lies anyway. We in the west can choose to read and research whatever we want, and we learn to think ourselves so we learn to see the difference between lies and truth. Muslims don't know what is truth or lies, they simply believe what they are told to believe. Everyone with a real education laugh at this man. But I do find it fascinating to watch the comment sections in his videos. All those Muslims who believe everything he says. It's so weird. And even tho archeology speak against him, history books and chronicles speak against him, everything within science speak against him and even children can debunk his claims. And still: Muslims swallow everything he says raw and believe everything. They obey like a well trained puppy and believe everything they are told to believe.
As a Dane, it annoys me that he refers to the Vikings as Germans and German speakers. The Vikings spoke Old Norse, which is a Germanic language, a language that is far from German. At that time, there was also no Germany in which to speak German.
Yes this guys misses a lot. He is not as bright as the comments on this page might think. He also said that there was bad Agricultural land and there for the vikings needed to leave. Yes this is true for Norway and Sweden but not in Denmark.
@@Yesnoyesno720 Roy is a dumbass, but he tickles the brains of stupid people. I still can't past him propagating the 5 Sherman myth or his insistance that "Dacia (Dashia) didn't exist because it was pronounced Dakia" (what an argument right?) but then in the same video saying Julius Caesar (Jooleus Seesur, so not even consistant on pushing latin pronounciation). He's bias and either ignorant or willfully omits facts.
Oh trust me, that's just the smallest of his amateurish errors. He basically ignores entire populations, maps are completely off compared to historic records and so on. That being said, he clearly sounds American, and I can tell you it is very hard to find any American, even among supposed 'experts' who has any clue about European Middle Age so it's not really his fault. :D
First of all, this video just melted by brain. He connected the dots to like six gaps in my understanding of early Europe. Second, the line "why are we fighting for these guys" is probably one of the most transformative lines in the history of man. That's how Byzantium became the Ottoman Empire, for example. This is a great video.
@@tyson2777 Can't cure stupid. if He'd responded he'd give you some semantic garbage about how your country didn't exist in its current form for "long enough" in his mind to be a valid nation, that's how the playbook works.
With great respect Dr. Casagranda, you might have mentioned the Viking and Norman affairs in Ireland The years 1014 and 1167/9 are etched into the minds of all Irish kids. Many thanks. M
@@pedropinheiro1091 "strongly recommend"? All he says is bs. No matter what subject he is on about, it's all lies and false information. Go read real history, and stop watching this dude.
To be a viking means to be a relief in the very common job at the time of rowing, where you would take turns. Scandinavia was at the time warm enough to grow grapes in some places. And had enormous riches in the form of timber and related products like tar. Tar especially would become a very important export, but this was a little bit after the Viking era.
Shouldn’t we separate what we actually know with certainty and what we can speculate and interpret? And as teachers be very clear in our lectures - what is known and what isn’t
I have an English surname. I have almost no Anglo-Saxon blood. I have a ton of Scandinavian. My family came to England from Normandy, in France, during the Norman conquest of 1066. Because the French King had previously given huge swaths of that part of France Scandinavian Vikings, they weren't 'French.' Apparently my ancestors (basically landed gentry) just kept inter-marrying with other Normans and only the occasional Anglo-Saxon.
Something important to know, for all who interested in history and/or support Ukraine: Rus' ought not to be confused with modern “Russia”, which derives its name from the Rus' but historically is a completely different state, which almost all its existence was at war with the Rus'. Just like the Holy Roman Empire was actually Germany, “Russia” is actually Muscovy, despite their best attempts to convince everybody otherwise. Its name “Russia" received only in the 18th century, when Peter I simply changed Muscovy’s name into the “All Russian Empire” (Russia originates from Rosia, name used by the Greek Orthodox Clergy in regards to Rus') Under the reign of Cathrine II Muscovites where even punished for continuing to identify as Muscovites, and were forced to call themselves Russian. Lands that Russia (Muscovy) claims were part of the original Rus', but actually weren't, are Novgorod, Suzdal, and Ryazan, since in historical texts of XI-XII centuries they are mentioned as separate entities from Rus'. They can be considered parts of extended Rus', although their culture was distinct from main Rus'. In 1493, Muscovite duke Ivan III appointed himself to be the Great Ruler of All Rus'. No other kings acknowledged that. From that point on Muscovy started to make false claims on Rus' ownership. “Russia” is an offshoot of Ukraine and not the other way round, despite what Soviet and Russian (Muscovite) historians have been trying to say for years. A Slavicised Finnic, then later, Mongolized offshoot. Kyiv was a developed cultured capital when Moscow was just another swamp village. Moreover, in the Italian sources of the 15th century it is likewise mentioned, that Russia is bordered by Poland to the west, Lithuania and Livonia to the north, and *Muscovy* to the east, further proving that Russia historically speaking, is an exonym of Ukraine, that was stolen by Muscovy. Germany used to call itself the Holy Roman Empire, that didn’t mean they became the Romans, and all of a sudden had a right to claim whole of Italy and its history, but yet, that’s exactly what Russia (Muscovy) did in regards to Rus'-Ukraine, which is a horrible injustice!
what a b*u*l*l*s*h*i*t, please excuse my French. The same dynasty of Viking Rurik was ruling country of Rus for 700 years. The first capital of Rus was Great Novgorod (city in modern Russia), then they moved it to Kiev, then it was moved to Vladimir city (also in Russia) and finally to Moscow. It was done for different political reasons. The same dynasty, the same country. There was no Ukraine at that time, there was Little Russia (Malorossia) alongside Great Russia and White Russia.
@@midturian2500 in other words, you are telling me that you know nothing about actual history and have either fallen for or are actively trying to spread false state propaganda that in turn is based on racist, fascist, supremacist and totalitarian motives.
That is downright nonsense. Why on Earth would Grand Prince of Kiev Vladimir Monomakh build a city of Vladimir, new capital on North-East Rus and future capital of Russia, in a “foreign land“? Why would Grand Prince pf Kiev Andrei Bogolubski move his capital abroad to a “foreign“ city of Suzdal? In fact, North-Eastern Rus was an expansion project of the mainland Kiev and Novgorod Rus. Ironically enough, Rostov-Suzdal principality was also referred as Zalesie or Zalesskaia Ukraina with many cities named after its eponyms in the present-day Ukraine.
@@Ramsa903 I guess we could squabble about the correct English termination forevermore since a concise translation of "Germanen" does not exist. Thus causing mentioned historical misunderstandings.
@bizzhat the correct translation for Germanen is germans. It's just the lack of words that creates a misunderstanding here since Deutsche also means germans. But it still correct to call people from germanic tribes germans since there is no other word in the English language and scientists including archeologists use this terminology.
@@Ramsa903 well just about time to develop proper terminology then... otherwise let's just call the English also Germans, due to Germanic origins, making them Germans by that very same definition. Or do we actually want to call the English Germans now? No, we don't. And neither do we need to call some Germanic people in scandinavia "Germans". Also, the fact that many people call some people some term doesn't mean that it is accurate either. The existence of a status quo does not make that status quo desirable or ideal. Just look at the history of the usage of the term "viking"... which (as he mentioned in the video) isn't really accurate but gets used a lot nowadays anyway. (And often conflated with generic fantasy barbarian tropes mixed with American or central Asian shamanism and a few entirely modern ideas and concepts, in total making up much of our modern-day collective associations with the term "viking", in stark contrast with actual historical reality. For 99,9% of modern people at least, ofc there's a few people that are interested and knowledgeable in actual history.)
@Heroesflorian i dont care what you want 😄 English are called English because of there Angeln ancestors England comes from Angeland. Have fun to bring the new terminology into the English language 😄 until then the people of germanic tribes are still called germans if you like it or not. Ciao
Interesting that Scandinavian sagas say that they are from Iran. There is a Kurdish tribe and region we until today call GERMIYAN. Identicall with the word GERMAN. And the main dialect of the Kurds is called Kurman(ci). Kurds like Persians belong to the Iranian people. Also KAVA is a blacksmith who kills a tyrannic overlord with a hammer in Kurdish mythology. Which is also the symbol of KAVA. In Scandinavian mythology we have the hammer of Thor
I have also heard that the Arian (race) and Iran (country) have the same origin in Indo-European language, as well as the word Aristocrat and even Bramin (the Indian caste). These guys definitely got around a lot.
WOW! This little bit of Viking/Norman history was absolutely fascinating. I'd LOVE to attend one of Dr Roy's classes. He reminds me why I love reading and learning about ancient history. Are there videos that record his entire history class? TH-cam or Vimeo?
"The sagas told them that the place the Germans (vikings (lol)) were originally from was Iran" What?? Where in the sagas? What has this guy been smoking?
That is not correct in many ways. To start woth, Russia or Rossia is just a Greek name for Rus adopted in XV century. Kievan Rus is a term invented in XIX century to identify the paricular period of history of Russia. Not Rus nor Byzantians identified Rus as Kievan. Rus was originally founded at the east of Finn bay atea around the city of Ladoga by prince Rurik who later founded Novgorod, the first major city of Rus. Kiev was added later by the second Rus prince Oleg / Helge thus establishing full control of the path from Normans to Byzantine. As for the North-Eastern Rus later called Russia, that was iniatially an expasion project of central Rus Kiev, as North-East was the only safe and sustainable geography. Rostov-Suzdal principality was also referred as Ukraina Beyond the Forests at that time.
"Ukrainian nobles" in 9th century "hired" the Rus? 1. "Ukraine" = "Borderland". Borderland of what? The term appeared centuries later when it actually was a borderland. 2. Rus (=Russia) was a term used for the local slavic population long before the Vikings appeared there NO EARLIER than the 10th century.
Ukraine (Україна) =Borderland is no more than russian propaganda to claim that they have rights on Ukraine. In russian language: prefix у means near, and they take word край as origing of країна and it means brink, not the border. BUT IT'S NOT SO IN Ukrainian language: prefix у means IN, країна meains COUNTRY.
@@xilon-vh3pt Except that when the term "ukraina" ("borderland") first appeared, the current ukrainian language had not yet appeared... Extraordinary, how even language has been politicized just to fit in with their strange ideology!
In a way, vikings still rule the world through Russian empire and Anglo-saxon empire i.e US. Norman descendants are still the ruling elites (real esate/land ownership/lords) in england and probably in US too.
The Íslendingabók didn't say Iran (Persia), they said Turkey ('Yngvi king of Turkey' ) because there was a medieval association (probably started by the Normans) that connected the Turks to the Trojans
It wasn’t Turks back then nor was it called Turkey. Turkey is a new fabricated name, and Turks are not native to this region. Turks were originally native to East Asia
1:33 "so they would go to what is today Latvia..." proceeds with map clearly showing that route went through Estonia and Muscovia. There were different routes "from Vargians to Greeks" though. Main one went through Ruthenian cities of Novgorod and Kyiv. Far away from Latvia.
This tells me a lot about the American education system. And, as expected, the Americans in the comments are all praise and just suck it all up, without any questions.
I appreciate his enthusiasm, but to Europeans there are a lot of oversimplifications in his version of History. Vikings called themselves Ostmen. They were indeed Germanic, but not "Germans". For people who don't know any better, Germany only came into existence in 1871. Before that, there were multiple kingdoms, principalities, etc... There was no Germany, France, Estonia, Lithuania, Latvia, Ukraine, Russia, or England. Nobody spoke English, or German, or French. In the land we now know as England, there were multiple smaller kingdoms (seven), called Mercia, Wessex, Essex, Northumbria, Sussex, East Anglia, and Kent.. they spoke Anglisc and it would've been unintelligible to contemporary speakers of English. The population was a mix of Celts (who migrated around 600 BC), Angles, Saxons, Jutes (these were already Germanic/Danish), and Roman settlers. In the land we now know as France, there were again multiple smaller kingdoms: Frankia/Francia, Burgundy and Provence. They spoke low latin / vulgar latin, old Occitan, and old French (a mix of Romance dialects). They were a Germanic people, with a strong Roman influence. In the land we identify today as Germany, there was the Kingdom of East Frankia. Yes. Another Frankia. Germany and France were two sides of the same coin. They spoke many languages from Old German (the language from which the Swedish, Norwegian, Dutch, English, and Danish languages evolved), to High German, Low German, Dutch, Frisian, etc... it was quite a large kingdom. There was no clear rule over the lands that are now the Baltics, or Russia, for that matter. The Bulgarians, who were a relatively stable and powerful kingdom in this age, came from what we'd call central Russia, and migrated to the Balkans.
Danes, Swedes and Norwegians are not Germans and have never been. So Rollo and his descendants never spoke german. There were Germanic though and spoke a Germanic language called Old Norse by some and Dane tongue by others. Germans are a Germanic people as well hence the name… but the origin of Germanic people are rooted in modern day Denmark and its isles and southern Sweden. If you knew more about Northern European history well then you’ll know how insulting and ignorant your claims are
scandanavia was a barren frozen wasteland until the northern germanic tribes (referred to as Germans in the video) populated the area around 500 BCE. They brought their language, their customs, their god Woden, which they later called Odin in scandanavia. So yes, Danes, Swedes, and Norwegians are definitely german. To say that they were never german is simply wrong. As far as Rollo, it is still uncertain where he was even born. It could have been either Sweden, Norway, or Denmark, according to experts, which means his first language was likely one of those local dialects. His second language, as the first ruler of Normandy, would have been an early version of French, whatever the local Frankish boys were speaking at the time when he Rolled through. How is any of what he said insulting to you or Scandanavians? Its just history... why are you mad about it?
@@tyleriver8There's been germanic people living in Scandinavia since long before 500 BCE, there's archeological findings that show proto-germanic people have lived here since before the early bronze age.
@@beecee2205 lol vikings are not jews but ,jews did play role in converting vikings in normandy to christinaity . you have to understand . vikings did war ,farming ,sailing also were merchant themselves . you didnot hear jewish communities in viking age scandanavia . it like jews went where christians went in europe . even charlmagne the christian emperor stop native europeans from money lending only gave access to jews to money lend .this gave jews to become rich quickly
The origin and use of the word Viking. Did the Scandinavians (Norwegians, Danes etc. ) call themselves Vikings? No. He is correct that it was not used as a Noun. However I feel like a misunderstanding from this presentation could take place. So did they use the word when talking of themselves, or someone else? Yes. “Viking” is used when describing the act of sailing to a place and raiding it. Essentially past and future tense. Example: “A month from now when the weather permits safe sailing, I will gone a viking for the summer.” “Vikingr” is essentially the present tense or the act of currently being out on a viking raid. Example: My brother wasn’t here for the summer equinox because he is currently with a Vikingr band. (I hope this was helpful)
@@stalefuruberg121 could also mean that. But no not wrong. I’ll try to get back with the references asap. But it most definitely was used to describe the man in regards to raiding parties during the summer season.
lol like I just made all that up or something is ludicrous. I’m going to check your answer for fun. So why don’t you actually look into mine. Or is that to much these days?
@@stalefuruberg121 okay I’m not going past google search as a reference. Just google Vikingr. It’s that simple. Furthermore your answer regarding it being derived from viken is such a stretch. And even if it originally was I am talking about the word Viking/ Vikingr. Google it first next time. SMH
If all you ate your whole life was cheese made from pasture milk and wild fish, you would also be able to carry a boat. Unlike what we eat today, gmo, farm raised fish, crap cheese from cows that eat God knows what and all sorts other garbage.
“And that’s how Russia was founded” 4:04. Oi, buddy, that’s not just historically inaccurate, that’s also parroting russian propaganda in justification of current genocide. Perhaps you could consult some of of the reputable sources to double check this? Plohiy, Snyder, Hrushevsky?
As one who is part Norman that one bit of Northern Spain is totally inaccurate. First most of those so call Arabs/Berbers where the minority population. Second the majority where native Celt- Iberians . And to a certain degree they learn Arabic; they commission many scholars to retranslate many works in Arabic back to the original Latin- Greek. As for Sicily there more Arabs there then region in Spain, this due territory being larger.My Norman ancestors did learn Arabic when they liberated Sicily but the great majority of population was of Greek/ Latin(Roman) ancestry. Not The Arab/Berbers who never fully subdued Sicily nor Southern Iberia. Put the native population was oppressed, hence why my noble ancestors liberated those regions. You Sir are slightly intellectually dishonest . One does reconquer ones land, one liberates it from the hand of invaders.
The native population was not oppressed. Otherwise there would be no trace of them. And they wouldn't be learning Arabic or translating anything. Anti Muslim and anti Arab mythology is rampant. If you want to see where peoole were oppressed look at the Spanish conquest of South America. Pizarro and Cortez wiping out entire peoples and taking over their wealth.
Dr. Roy Casagranda you have a very entertaining way of presenting, however yours is a learned opinion. I am sure you remember that yours is only an opinion.👍
The term "Russia" only started being used in the 17th century when Muscovy tried to conquer Ukraine and succeeded in annexing Ukraine east of the Dniepro river. That annexation led to the creation of Russia. It is a modern Russian myth that Ujraine has always been part of Russia going right back to Kievian Rus'.
For those of us who have actually studied history, these politically motivated distortions are profoundly tedious. No amount of explanation will change these people's misconceptions because they are motivated not by a thirst for knowledge, but by a self-serving ideology, in accordance with which all the arts and sciences must be molded. Sad.
Yeah there was no Ukraine when Russia was founded. That's all really artistic but misleading. Ukraine was established in the XX century. If someone uses the word Ukraine while talking about Kievan Rus - be sure, the guy is just riding on the political occasion. And speaking then about some guys who were just strong enough to take over - it's not just riding but enforcing it with manipulating history. It's just the same thing that Putin did in the interview with Tucker Carlson.
@@Mokh7777 Yes. I know it. I think it fits together. Rusyns are somewhat different from typical Slavs. They are more temperamental and there are many musically and artistically gifted people. Where I come from, we use some words that are not Slavic and we don't even know their origin. Ade - here, ande - there, adika - in the past, hača - foal, etc. The first who came with the theory that Rusyns are the slavitized Sarmatians was polyhistorian Matej Bel, who studied the Rusyns.
Dr. Roy Casagranda is a man that makes you not just love history but makes you connect all the dots, a true jem. and the way he explains it is simple yet so excellent that you never get bored. thank you guys, thank you dr for all the lectures.
R u a Jew?
Or just an american?
Like a lond ago song, named "simple minds"
@viorica8402 🙄 weird to call others "simple minded" with your generalities and being too lazy to correct your spelling errors
@@viorica8402 Interesting because the jews were bankers for the normans. The catholic church was created by the jews and at least 4-5 popes were jewish. The jews set out to conquer the anglo saxons and subjugate them to a raceless ethic.
@@tuckerbugeater lol first pope of rome is jewish idiot
@@TheMunchkinita2509 Everyone who listen to this professor and believe what he say are simple minded. Nothing he say is true.
He just mix different things, events and people togheter, he use lies and deception to make it look like Islam is true and to make Muslims look smart. And he try to promote Arabic culture.
But he fail everytime. He only fool Muslims, they are already indoctrinated and they only learn lies anyway.
We in the west can choose to read and research whatever we want, and we learn to think ourselves so we learn to see the difference between lies and truth. Muslims don't know what is truth or lies, they simply believe what they are told to believe.
Everyone with a real education laugh at this man.
But I do find it fascinating to watch the comment sections in his videos. All those Muslims who believe everything he says. It's so weird.
And even tho archeology speak against him, history books and chronicles speak against him, everything within science speak against him and even children can debunk his claims. And still: Muslims swallow everything he says raw and believe everything. They obey like a well trained puppy and believe everything they are told to believe.
as a lecturer myself I really respect you prof. Ive been following your videos on you tube since 2022
@@izdihar70 WTF? Nothing he say is true. He got it all wrong.
@@izdihar70 Are you joking? He is wrong about absolutely everything he says. Just lies and false information.
As a Dane, it annoys me that he refers to the Vikings as Germans and German speakers. The Vikings spoke Old Norse, which is a Germanic language, a language that is far from German. At that time, there was also no Germany in which to speak German.
As a german I can relate to that. German Germanic. 🧐
Who were the Franks?
Yes this guys misses a lot. He is not as bright as the comments on this page might think. He also said that there was bad Agricultural land and there for the vikings needed to leave. Yes this is true for Norway and Sweden but not in Denmark.
@@Yesnoyesno720 Roy is a dumbass, but he tickles the brains of stupid people.
I still can't past him propagating the 5 Sherman myth or his insistance that "Dacia (Dashia) didn't exist because it was pronounced Dakia" (what an argument right?) but then in the same video saying Julius Caesar (Jooleus Seesur, so not even consistant on pushing latin pronounciation).
He's bias and either ignorant or willfully omits facts.
Oh trust me, that's just the smallest of his amateurish errors. He basically ignores entire populations, maps are completely off compared to historic records and so on. That being said, he clearly sounds American, and I can tell you it is very hard to find any American, even among supposed 'experts' who has any clue about European Middle Age so it's not really his fault. :D
First of all, this video just melted by brain. He connected the dots to like six gaps in my understanding of early Europe. Second, the line "why are we fighting for these guys" is probably one of the most transformative lines in the history of man. That's how Byzantium became the Ottoman Empire, for example. This is a great video.
It's bs everything.
when your average jewish professor teaches your history
Most of what he said is so insanely wrong
Its more than teaching he's transferring heat through the passion of knowledge...
propaganda
This guy is an amazing teacher!
He isn't ....
As a norwegian I can say this is bs.
@@tyson2777 you weren't always norweegian
@@tuckerbugeater Born and raised in Norway, and lived here my whole life. So what do you mean by: weren't always Norwegian?
@@tyson2777 Can't cure stupid. if He'd responded he'd give you some semantic garbage about how your country didn't exist in its current form for "long enough" in his mind to be a valid nation, that's how the playbook works.
More long form content, please. Subscribed!
Fascinating! Love the narration. You bring history back to life Sir. Thank you. Danke. Merci. Kitos. Tack.
This is so engaging.
Thank you
Dr. Roy you've made me love History😍...Thanks a bunch😊
@@GODSPOWERUMANAH Just remember to read real history and stop listening to this guy. He is wrong about everything he says.
@@tyson2777 What historian do you suggest?
Thank You!
People are sucking in this half knowledge without even questioning is frightening and my question is, where can I buy my Dr.?
Outstanding! This is the best channel on TH-cam by far.
What is 2nd best?
With great respect Dr. Casagranda, you might have mentioned the Viking and Norman affairs in Ireland The years 1014 and 1167/9 are etched into the minds of all Irish kids. Many thanks. M
This video is a cut from his lecture about the Crusades (which I strongly recommend) so he focused on the central Europe part
@@pedropinheiro1091 "strongly recommend"? All he says is bs. No matter what subject he is on about, it's all lies and false information. Go read real history, and stop watching this dude.
@@tyson2777what is bullshit? And can you suggest readings? ❤
Thank you, this is awesome!
This man speaks about history, like he was there to see it. I love it
More please
To be a viking means to be a relief in the very common job at the time of rowing, where you would take turns. Scandinavia was at the time warm enough to grow grapes in some places. And had enormous riches in the form of timber and related products like tar. Tar especially would become a very important export, but this was a little bit after the Viking era.
What a joy ;o) Thank you for interpreting History for us.
Loose interpretation for sure
Pleeeeeeease! More!!!
Shouldn’t we separate what we actually know with certainty and what we can speculate and interpret? And as teachers be very clear in our lectures - what is known and what isn’t
Agree, this is entertainment, not teaching
I have an English surname. I have almost no Anglo-Saxon blood. I have a ton of Scandinavian. My family came to England from Normandy, in France, during the Norman conquest of 1066. Because the French King had previously given huge swaths of that part of France Scandinavian Vikings, they weren't 'French.' Apparently my ancestors (basically landed gentry) just kept inter-marrying with other Normans and only the occasional Anglo-Saxon.
Norman conquest of England was a crusade authorised by the papacy.
@@unibks4382worst thing that ever happened to Britain
Is there any research as to how much of land ownership in britain belongs to Norman descended Elites.
Who were the bankers for the Normans? Who ran the Papacy?
Cardinal Hildebrand
We know 😉✡️
Something important to know, for all who interested in history and/or support Ukraine:
Rus' ought not to be confused with modern “Russia”, which derives its name from the Rus' but historically is a completely different state, which almost all its existence was at war with the Rus'.
Just like the Holy Roman Empire was actually Germany, “Russia” is actually Muscovy, despite their best attempts to convince everybody otherwise.
Its name “Russia" received only in the 18th century, when Peter I simply changed Muscovy’s name into the “All Russian Empire” (Russia originates from Rosia, name used by the Greek Orthodox Clergy in regards to Rus')
Under the reign of Cathrine II Muscovites where even punished for continuing to identify as Muscovites, and were forced to call themselves Russian.
Lands that Russia (Muscovy) claims were part of the original Rus', but actually weren't, are Novgorod, Suzdal, and Ryazan, since in historical texts of XI-XII centuries they are mentioned as separate entities from Rus'. They can be considered parts of extended Rus', although their culture was distinct from main Rus'.
In 1493, Muscovite duke Ivan III appointed himself to be the Great Ruler of All Rus'. No other kings acknowledged that. From that point on Muscovy started to make false claims on Rus' ownership.
“Russia” is an offshoot of Ukraine and not the other way round, despite what Soviet and Russian (Muscovite) historians have been trying to say for years. A Slavicised Finnic, then later, Mongolized offshoot. Kyiv was a developed cultured capital when Moscow was just another swamp village.
Moreover, in the Italian sources of the 15th century it is likewise mentioned, that Russia is bordered by Poland to the west, Lithuania and Livonia to the north, and *Muscovy* to the east, further proving that Russia historically speaking, is an exonym of Ukraine, that was stolen by Muscovy.
Germany used to call itself the Holy Roman Empire, that didn’t mean they became the Romans, and all of a sudden had a right to claim whole of Italy and its history, but yet, that’s exactly what Russia (Muscovy) did in regards to Rus'-Ukraine, which is a horrible injustice!
what a b*u*l*l*s*h*i*t, please excuse my French. The same dynasty of Viking Rurik was ruling country of Rus for 700 years. The first capital of Rus was Great Novgorod (city in modern Russia), then they moved it to Kiev, then it was moved to Vladimir city (also in Russia) and finally to Moscow. It was done for different political reasons. The same dynasty, the same country. There was no Ukraine at that time, there was Little Russia (Malorossia) alongside Great Russia and White Russia.
@@midturian2500 incorrect
@@midturian2500 in other words, you are telling me that you know nothing about actual history and have either fallen for or are actively trying to spread false state propaganda that in turn is based on racist, fascist, supremacist and totalitarian motives.
That is downright nonsense.
Why on Earth would Grand Prince of Kiev Vladimir Monomakh build a city of Vladimir, new capital on North-East Rus and future capital of Russia, in a “foreign land“?
Why would Grand Prince pf Kiev Andrei Bogolubski move his capital abroad to a “foreign“ city of Suzdal?
In fact, North-Eastern Rus was an expansion project of the mainland Kiev and Novgorod Rus. Ironically enough, Rostov-Suzdal principality was also referred as Zalesie or Zalesskaia Ukraina with many cities named after its eponyms in the present-day Ukraine.
@@nikolaychernushenko incorrect, you are more than welcome to fact check everything
Really amazing guy, his lectures are fascinating
😂
Fairy Tales often are..
Really good (hi)story teller. Really made our past come alive in vivid detail...
I love to Learn from this man, thank you so much
interesting, tho I do have to critisize the term "German" and would prefer "Germanic (-sphere)" as to deter continuous misunderstanding.
'Germanics' doesn't exist, so calling people from a germanic tribe germans is the correct wording.
@@Ramsa903 I guess we could squabble about the correct English termination forevermore since a concise translation of "Germanen" does not exist. Thus causing mentioned historical misunderstandings.
@bizzhat the correct translation for Germanen is germans. It's just the lack of words that creates a misunderstanding here since Deutsche also means germans. But it still correct to call people from germanic tribes germans since there is no other word in the English language and scientists including archeologists use this terminology.
@@Ramsa903 well just about time to develop proper terminology then... otherwise let's just call the English also Germans, due to Germanic origins, making them Germans by that very same definition. Or do we actually want to call the English Germans now? No, we don't. And neither do we need to call some Germanic people in scandinavia "Germans".
Also, the fact that many people call some people some term doesn't mean that it is accurate either. The existence of a status quo does not make that status quo desirable or ideal. Just look at the history of the usage of the term "viking"... which (as he mentioned in the video) isn't really accurate but gets used a lot nowadays anyway. (And often conflated with generic fantasy barbarian tropes mixed with American or central Asian shamanism and a few entirely modern ideas and concepts, in total making up much of our modern-day collective associations with the term "viking", in stark contrast with actual historical reality. For 99,9% of modern people at least, ofc there's a few people that are interested and knowledgeable in actual history.)
@Heroesflorian i dont care what you want 😄 English are called English because of there Angeln ancestors England comes from Angeland. Have fun to bring the new terminology into the English language 😄 until then the people of germanic tribes are still called germans if you like it or not. Ciao
Really incredible
Interesting that Scandinavian sagas say that they are from Iran.
There is a Kurdish tribe and region we until today call GERMIYAN. Identicall with the word GERMAN. And the main dialect of the Kurds is called Kurman(ci).
Kurds like Persians belong to the Iranian people.
Also KAVA is a blacksmith who kills a tyrannic overlord with a hammer in Kurdish mythology. Which is also the symbol of KAVA.
In Scandinavian mythology we have the hammer of Thor
I have also heard that the Arian (race) and Iran (country) have the same origin in Indo-European language, as well as the word Aristocrat and even Bramin (the Indian caste). These guys definitely got around a lot.
WOW! This little bit of Viking/Norman history was absolutely fascinating. I'd LOVE to attend one of Dr Roy's classes. He reminds me why I love reading and learning about ancient history. Are there videos that record his entire history class? TH-cam or Vimeo?
"The sagas told them that the place the Germans (vikings (lol)) were originally from was Iran" What?? Where in the sagas? What has this guy been smoking?
this guy is full of shit basically
Literally eugenics/Aryan theory.
@@GekkeHenkie1313 vikings are decedants of germany tribes of corded ware culture germany
@@GekkeHenkie1313 Literally an idiot.
Yes odin, their founding father supposedly migrated from the Caucasus, which is also the homeland of Iranians/Aryans.
Thank for such a interesting lecture.
I wish you could talk in more details regarding the origin of Viking in persia
Thanks
"Godfrey" from "Godfred" = "Good Peace"
No, the Rus didn’t found Russia, they founded the Kievan Rus. 300-400 years later, Russia started and used the Rus name.
That's pretty much exactly what he said
That is not correct in many ways.
To start woth, Russia or Rossia is just a Greek name for Rus adopted in XV century. Kievan Rus is a term invented in XIX century to identify the paricular period of history of Russia. Not Rus nor Byzantians identified Rus as Kievan. Rus was originally founded at the east of Finn bay atea around the city of Ladoga by prince Rurik who later founded Novgorod, the first major city of Rus. Kiev was added later by the second Rus prince Oleg / Helge thus establishing full control of the path from Normans to Byzantine.
As for the North-Eastern Rus later called Russia, that was iniatially an expasion project of central Rus Kiev, as North-East was the only safe and sustainable geography. Rostov-Suzdal principality was also referred as Ukraina Beyond the Forests at that time.
He explained in such a manner even Americans can understand him 🤌👏👏🫡
More long content please
apeese mujeets
Makes sense Iran means Aryan.
Yes. The only thing NOT Aryan about Iran is the Arab invasions and Islamic conquests.
That makes a lot more things make sense....
Great (true) story teller !
What's his name?
please where can i see the rest of this lecture thank you?
"Ukrainian nobles" in 9th century "hired" the Rus?
1. "Ukraine" = "Borderland". Borderland of what? The term appeared centuries later when it actually was a borderland.
2. Rus (=Russia) was a term used for the local slavic population long before the Vikings appeared there NO EARLIER than the 10th century.
There was no Ukraine, it's new country.
@@dpodobas9272 lol goy putin is good leader i think
I would add there were no slavic tribes to be enslaved on the way from Rzgev along the Volga river to Kaspian sea.
Ukraine (Україна) =Borderland is no more than russian propaganda to claim that they have rights on Ukraine. In russian language: prefix у means near, and they take word край as origing of країна and it means brink, not the border. BUT IT'S NOT SO IN Ukrainian language: prefix у means IN, країна meains COUNTRY.
@@xilon-vh3pt Except that when the term "ukraina" ("borderland") first appeared, the current ukrainian language had not yet appeared...
Extraordinary, how even language has been politicized just to fit in with their strange ideology!
That explains a lot. Thank you, and...it's my birthday! Love this channel. 🎉🥳
The amount of death is insane, how big was the world’s population at that time? There can’t of being anyone left alive after all this madness
❤I simply LoWe this!❤
This guy is such a great historian and teacher. Personally I know this stuff as it is my interest field but listening to him is so entertaining
I've been saying for years that the Crusades were just larger scale Viking raids. Finally I've got backup.
Crusades is medieval Zionism. Read background of pope who authorised Norman conquest of England.
In a way, vikings still rule the world through Russian empire and Anglo-saxon empire i.e US. Norman descendants are still the ruling elites (real esate/land ownership/lords) in england and probably in US too.
I have the purest blood of all. My bloodline goes back to the last common ancestor.
Dr Roy Casagranda is my favorite history teacher.
lol anything to appease muslims lmao
I think the gothic cathedrals locations and their true builders have a lot to say about the true story about this part of history
true buidlers were not arabs or muslims
The Íslendingabók didn't say Iran (Persia), they said Turkey ('Yngvi king of Turkey' ) because there was a medieval association (probably started by the Normans) that connected the Turks to the Trojans
It wasn’t Turks back then nor was it called Turkey. Turkey is a new fabricated name, and Turks are not native to this region. Turks were originally native to East Asia
1:33 "so they would go to what is today Latvia..." proceeds with map clearly showing that route went through Estonia and Muscovia.
There were different routes "from Vargians to Greeks" though. Main one went through Ruthenian cities of Novgorod and Kyiv. Far away from Latvia.
So you are telling they did not invade persia in that days? They were there for trade? It isnt making any sense
This tells me a lot about the American education system. And, as expected, the Americans in the comments are all praise and just suck it all up, without any questions.
Vikings series really was pretty accurate
40000 vikings besieged Paris
Not a chance that number is way too high
@@rhzyo Correction: "FOUR THOUSAND"
@@rhzyo en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Siege_of_Paris_(845)
@@vinozarazzi5633 I thought maybe you added an extra 0 by accident but wasn't sure
@@rhzyo Thank you for correcting me Sire! ;)
I just got here. I’m two months late.
Can I copy someone’s notes?
Do you know anything of Sir Gilbert de Neuville at the battle of Hastings?
Fantastic!
We (first white indo-europeans) don't come from Iran, we come from the Ukrainian steps / current day Donbas and surroundings
Arabs used to call the vikings RUS , specially Levant arabs
cool.. this makes Vinland saga make more sense
I appreciate his enthusiasm, but to Europeans there are a lot of oversimplifications in his version of History.
Vikings called themselves Ostmen. They were indeed Germanic, but not "Germans". For people who don't know any better, Germany only came into existence in 1871. Before that, there were multiple kingdoms, principalities, etc...
There was no Germany, France, Estonia, Lithuania, Latvia, Ukraine, Russia, or England.
Nobody spoke English, or German, or French.
In the land we now know as England, there were multiple smaller kingdoms (seven), called Mercia, Wessex, Essex, Northumbria, Sussex, East Anglia, and Kent.. they spoke Anglisc and it would've been unintelligible to contemporary speakers of English. The population was a mix of Celts (who migrated around 600 BC), Angles, Saxons, Jutes (these were already Germanic/Danish), and Roman settlers.
In the land we now know as France, there were again multiple smaller kingdoms: Frankia/Francia, Burgundy and Provence. They spoke low latin / vulgar latin, old Occitan, and old French (a mix of Romance dialects). They were a Germanic people, with a strong Roman influence.
In the land we identify today as Germany, there was the Kingdom of East Frankia. Yes. Another Frankia. Germany and France were two sides of the same coin. They spoke many languages from Old German (the language from which the Swedish, Norwegian, Dutch, English, and Danish languages evolved), to High German, Low German, Dutch, Frisian, etc... it was quite a large kingdom.
There was no clear rule over the lands that are now the Baltics, or Russia, for that matter. The Bulgarians, who were a relatively stable and powerful kingdom in this age, came from what we'd call central Russia, and migrated to the Balkans.
Danes, Swedes and Norwegians are not Germans and have never been. So Rollo and his descendants never spoke german. There were Germanic though and spoke a Germanic language called Old Norse by some and Dane tongue by others.
Germans are a Germanic people as well hence the name… but the origin of Germanic people are rooted in modern day Denmark and its isles and southern Sweden.
If you knew more about Northern European history well then you’ll know how insulting and ignorant your claims are
Do you have som tip where I can read more about this? Maybe a book?
scandanavia was a barren frozen wasteland until the northern germanic tribes (referred to as Germans in the video) populated the area around 500 BCE. They brought their language, their customs, their god Woden, which they later called Odin in scandanavia. So yes, Danes, Swedes, and Norwegians are definitely german. To say that they were never german is simply wrong. As far as Rollo, it is still uncertain where he was even born. It could have been either Sweden, Norway, or Denmark, according to experts, which means his first language was likely one of those local dialects. His second language, as the first ruler of Normandy, would have been an early version of French, whatever the local Frankish boys were speaking at the time when he Rolled through. How is any of what he said insulting to you or Scandanavians? Its just history... why are you mad about it?
Insulting, cmon... We are all germanic like chill man
Its probably his ego gotten hurt, i bet hes Swedish or just dont like Roy because his anti white washing history lessons.
@@tyleriver8There's been germanic people living in Scandinavia since long before 500 BCE, there's archeological findings that show proto-germanic people have lived here since before the early bronze age.
where and which Saga says that the Vikings are from Persia?
He is such a charming presenter.. too bad he loves speculation and making stuff up to fit his political world view.
Too bad you feel you have to say that because history doesn't agree with your , probably simplistic, world views
Can we get a video of what happen to the Israelites after being freed from Babylon. Where are they now? Did Columbus fine America from Book of Ezra
The guy who never lets the truth get in the way of a good yarn
This kind of scholarship is fascinating.
"Wait, these French speaking, blue eyed, blond Vikings, went native".
It's true vikings can be traced back to scythians who are iranic
R1a haplogroup
@@Wazir.Akbar.Khan.wardag khazars
vikings are decedants of germany tribes of corded ware culture germany while scythians are from adronovo culture in southern russia
@@Wazir.Akbar.Khan.wardag most vikings haplo i1 and r1b
@@tuckerbugeater khazars are not vikings ,khazars are turkis people ,vikings are not turkic
Some theory says Vikings - VI - 6 KINGS. The tribe of DAN went to north. Denmark is where DAN made a mark.
No.
cus Vikings look just like Jews dont they.
@@beecee2205 lol vikings are not jews but ,jews did play role in converting vikings in normandy to christinaity . you have to understand . vikings did war ,farming ,sailing also were merchant themselves . you didnot hear jewish communities in viking age scandanavia . it like jews went where christians went in europe . even charlmagne the christian emperor stop native europeans from money lending only gave access to jews to money lend .this gave jews to become rich quickly
lol just like anglo hewbrew israelitism like bs .complete lies
Hmm.. a rather creative way of presenting that part of history... Straying a bit too far from the truth though, in my opinion..🧐
your average jewish history professor belike
I’m actually a direct paternal ancestor of Rollo so my super great great grandfather
There were no "Ukrainians" back then... Only Slavs. Eastern Slavs
they carry the ship means they had a map?
this guy is just brilliant, i wish i had had him at school, man he makes history interesting
Vikings weren’t Germans, they were Germanic. Big difference.
Multiple comments quibbling about this. Crazy how inconsequential shit is magnified to make no real point.
Lucky the north calotte was not a part of this. Another thing, this might be linked to that the romans evented Islam to conquer Israel.
Where do i see the rest or more of this same piece
The origin and use of the word Viking.
Did the Scandinavians (Norwegians, Danes etc. ) call themselves Vikings?
No.
He is correct that it was not used as a Noun. However I feel like a misunderstanding from this presentation could take place.
So did they use the word when talking of themselves, or someone else?
Yes.
“Viking” is used when describing the act of sailing to a place and raiding it. Essentially past and future tense.
Example: “A month from now when the weather permits safe sailing, I will gone a viking for the summer.”
“Vikingr” is essentially the present tense or the act of currently being out on a viking raid.
Example: My brother wasn’t here for the summer equinox because he is currently with a Vikingr band.
(I hope this was helpful)
Wrong. Viking means man from Viken. South east Norway.
@@stalefuruberg121 could also mean that. But no not wrong. I’ll try to get back with the references asap. But it most definitely was used to describe the man in regards to raiding parties during the summer season.
lol like I just made all that up or something is ludicrous. I’m going to check your answer for fun. So why don’t you actually look into mine. Or is that to much these days?
@@stalefuruberg121 okay I’m not going past google search as a reference. Just google Vikingr. It’s that simple.
Furthermore your answer regarding it being derived from viken is such a stretch. And even if it originally was I am talking about the word Viking/ Vikingr.
Google it first next time. SMH
very interesting, but plenty of simplifications.
but worth it..
If all you ate your whole life was cheese made from pasture milk and wild fish, you would also be able to carry a boat. Unlike what we eat today, gmo, farm raised fish, crap cheese from cows that eat God knows what and all sorts other garbage.
The difference between Rus and russia is like the difference between Honor and gonorrhea
The sagas were written down in the 16th century by a christian monk, in iceland, 300 years after the conversion to Christianity....
Good.
Part 2?
“And that’s how Russia was founded” 4:04. Oi, buddy, that’s not just historically inaccurate, that’s also parroting russian propaganda in justification of current genocide. Perhaps you could consult some of of the reputable sources to double check this? Plohiy, Snyder, Hrushevsky?
As one who is part Norman that one bit of Northern Spain is totally inaccurate. First most of those so call Arabs/Berbers where the minority population. Second the majority where native Celt- Iberians . And to a certain degree they learn Arabic; they commission many scholars to retranslate many works in Arabic back to the original Latin- Greek. As for Sicily there more Arabs there then region in Spain, this due territory being larger.My Norman ancestors did learn Arabic when they liberated Sicily but the great majority of population was of Greek/ Latin(Roman) ancestry. Not The Arab/Berbers who never fully subdued Sicily nor Southern Iberia. Put the native population was oppressed, hence why my noble ancestors liberated those regions. You Sir are slightly intellectually dishonest . One does reconquer ones land, one liberates it from the hand of invaders.
your average jewish history professor belike
The native population was not oppressed. Otherwise there would be no trace of them. And they wouldn't be learning Arabic or translating anything. Anti Muslim and anti Arab mythology is rampant. If you want to see where peoole were oppressed look at the Spanish conquest of South America. Pizarro and Cortez wiping out entire peoples and taking over their wealth.
Love this , sad we were never taught the truth
Dr. Roy Casagranda you have a very entertaining way of presenting, however yours is a learned opinion. I am sure you remember that yours is only an opinion.👍
The term "Russia" only started being used in the 17th century when Muscovy tried to conquer Ukraine and succeeded in annexing Ukraine east of the Dniepro river. That annexation led to the creation of Russia. It is a modern Russian myth that Ujraine has always been part of Russia going right back to Kievian Rus'.
Erik The Roze Rassia.
Sorry, it's not true
@@dpodobas9272 Are Viking or Nordman.
The term "Russia" ("Rus'") has been around since the 7th (seventh) century, f.y.i.
For those of us who have actually studied history, these politically motivated distortions are profoundly tedious. No amount of explanation will change these people's misconceptions because they are motivated not by a thirst for knowledge, but by a self-serving ideology, in accordance with which all the arts and sciences must be molded. Sad.
🔥🔥
Wonderful! I love Roay Casagranda and I hate all the dumb-rich little daddies boys who are trying to discredit him!
Great talker...
Yeah there was no Ukraine when Russia was founded. That's all really artistic but misleading. Ukraine was established in the XX century. If someone uses the word Ukraine while talking about Kievan Rus - be sure, the guy is just riding on the political occasion. And speaking then about some guys who were just strong enough to take over - it's not just riding but enforcing it with manipulating history. It's just the same thing that Putin did in the interview with Tucker Carlson.
I agree with you. It's more with the current political agenda
Catpat Rusyns (Rusnaki) are Roxoalans (White Alans, Croats). Slavized Sarmatian (Alanian) tribe. I know it.
Alans, Roxoalans, Sarmatians were Iranians. Alani means Iranian/Aryan in Iranian dialects.
@@Mokh7777 Yes. I know it. I think it fits together. Rusyns are somewhat different from typical Slavs. They are more temperamental and there are many musically and artistically gifted people. Where I come from, we use some words that are not Slavic and we don't even know their origin. Ade - here, ande - there, adika - in the past, hača - foal, etc. The first who came with the theory that Rusyns are the slavitized Sarmatians was polyhistorian Matej Bel, who studied the Rusyns.
There was no Ukraine in that Age.
For a historian to talk about 8th century Ukraine is totally ridiculous.
So before the Germans went to Scandinavia who were the population there then?😂
Wow
Wait, isn't vikings/germanics from iran
Eugenics/Aryan theorie....
What the actual fuck youtube!
vikings are from corded ware germany
Its in the sagas dweebo