I don't think that's "X history more than Y history" a correct way to argue about history :-)

It's definitely a fair to name that Ukrainian history from your perspective. It's a also fair to name that Russian history.

A lot of people could argue that is specifically Cossack history, because Cossacks could be viewed as separate ethnicity with their own history.

Somebody will say that's Russian word is correct, because "Russian" is umbrella term for both velikorossy (Great Russians) and malorossy (Ukrainians) :-)

But it's definitely fair from modern Russian perspective and from modern Ukrainian perspective to claim this history as their own.

Looks like we have perfect nicknames for commenting under this post.

At that point in time Russian-Ukrainian history was tight knit. It is after Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth influence of Western Ukraine did what I assume your understanding of the difference between Russia-Ukraine's history start.

Referring to Zaporozhian Cossacks as Russian is quite a stretch, and sure to upset Ukrainians. Cossacks generally are a part of Russian-Ukrainian history, but this group has typically been considered Ukrainian, based on their geography and ultimate integration into Ukraine.

In truth, the Zaporozhian Cossacks were their own people, to classify them as strictly Russian or Ukrainian somewhat erases their culture and history.

But I didn't say that Zaporozhians are distinctly Russian either, just that at that point in time the divide between Ukraine and Russia was a lot less clear. People who drive a hard line about differences of these people, especially in those times, are usually politically and/or ideologically motivated and have barely any knowledge of the historical context.

You're absolutely correct that the Zaporozhians were somewhat of their own people, much like the Don and other groups of Cossacks - which can be seen in them uprising against the Polish-Lithuanian rulers and the Czar respectively and trying to form their own states. I wouldn't go so for as to say that they aren't part of Russian-Ukrainian history either, just that claiming for them to be the same as modern Ukrainians or modern Russians makes as much sense as modern Greeks claiming to be direct descendants of Alexander the Great.

> claiming for them to be the same as modern Ukrainians or modern Russians makes as much sense as modern Greeks claiming to be direct descendants of Alexander the Great.

don't say this to either of the macedonias :)

So how about 'le mot de cambronne' or the reply from the battle of the bulge? ("nuts")

*Rus

*Rus'

Русь