>>209494731
> Maybe we better conclude that "etymology" doesn't matter then?
You can, but it will forever remain in history, and everyone will know the Germanic roots of Russian statehood.
> Imagine calling Medieval and Renaissance France "buckbroken" lmao.
Gauls buckbroken by romans then franks then anglos then germans
> Russians from Voronezh have virtually zero Turkic admixture
They have turkic blood. Moreover, there are a lot of people who have Tatar roots, and knowing this they were not included in the sample set
> No such thing. Romanovs were a purely Russian, Slavic dynasty democratically elected by other Russian Slavs. Meanwhile, 2 out of 3 (or 4, if we count that one from Hungary) ancient samples of Rurikid princes we have were Slavic, R1a and I2a respectively.
Nice cope

>>209494768
> ruotsi is a different thing
Learn etymologies of all those words

Back | Go to board

Board:

/int/

Thread:

What's there in common between these regions?