World Coins Chat: Ukraine & Crimea

31 posts

» Quick access to the last post

Ukraine is a republic in Eastern Europe. The land is mostly farmland, and the main natural resources are various metals, oil and natural gas, and of course arable land. Although it is a relatively diverse country, it is still majority Slavic with a large Russian population, which has caused conflicts in recent years.

The history of Ukraine is not as long as Russia, and it hasn't issued coins through most of its existence, meaning that I can cut back on it quite a bit. In addition, I am including the history of Crimea, which was often independent, now part of Ukraine, and occupied by Russia.

A personal note: Most of you may know Ukraine as my ancestral homeland, which is kind of true (because nearly my entire family is from there) except for the fact that I am also 100% Jewish. I also have a lot of family left in the country, so I follow the news a lot, which is why the recent revolution is covered in detail.

So, let us begin!

Like Russia, the modern history of Ukraine begins with Keivan Rus (founded 880), a Slavic state located in present-day European Russian and northern Ukraine. Keivan Rus adopted Orthodox Christianity (a major religion in modern Ukraine) from the Byzantine Empire, which is reflected on their Byzantine-style coins:


(Note the presence of the tryzub, a symbol of Ukraine)

Like Russia, Ukraine was overrun by the Mongols. In 1240 Kiev was destroyed and the rest of the country was left in ruins. However, in 1253, Danylo Romanovich established an independent state in the area that is now Western Ukraine. The country he created, Kingdom of Galicia–Volhynia, became a powerful force in Eastern Europe at the time. However, it was still a vassal state of the Mongol Empire, and it used Mongol coins as a result.



In the mid-14th century, Galicia–Volhynia came under Polish domination. Meanwhile the Lithuanians took Eastern Ukraine and Kiev, thus beginning a pattern of foreign domination of Ukraine. In 1386, Poland and Lithuania formed a dynastic union, and of course Ukraine became part of it. In 1569, the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth was founded and Ukraine formed the eastern frontier of the country. Polish-Lithuanian coins were used in Ukraine at that time.



In 1441, after the decline of the Mongol Empire, Hacı I Giray, a descendant of Ghengiz Kahn, founded a Mongol Kahnate in Crimea and the surrounding areas, the Crimean Kahnate. However, he was not able to fight off internal rivals until 1449 when he consolidated his power. After his death, his sons fought over which one should succeed him. The Ottomans intervened and installed Meñli I Giray. The Ottomans later imprisoned him but brought him back after three years under condition that he accept Ottoman sovereignty. Nevertheless, the Ottomans treated the powerful Crimean Kahnate as an ally rather than a vassal because of its military successes. Crimean coins essentially followed the Mongol pattern regardless of the political situation.



Now, back to Ukraine. The majority of the Ukrainian higher class received a lot of Polish influences and the peasant class no longer wanted to turn to them for protection. Instead, they became more loyal to the Zaporozhian/ Dnieper Cossaks, an ethnic Ukrainian military group. The Zaporozhian Cossaks fought off Crimean invasions and eventually declared independence and founded the Zaporozhian Host. The Zaporozhian Host was essentially a state which was owed loyalty to the Polish-Lithuaninian Commonwealth and assisted the Poles on the battlefield. However, in reality, it was very independent.

In 1648, the Cossak leader Bohdan Khmelnytsky led a massive rebellion against the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth. The rebellion began a 30-year war known as "The Ruin" for its devastating consequences for Ukraine. Khmelnytsky signed a military agreement with Russia, which assisted the Cossaks on in their war. Although Khmelnytsky nearly destroyed his country, brought it under foreign domination, and committed large-scale ethnic cleansing, he is viewed as a nationalist hero in modern-day Ukraine. In the end, Ukraine was partitioned by Russia and Poland.


Rebelling Cossaks

In 1709, the Cossak leader, Ivan Mazepa, allied himself with Sweden, against Russia. Peter the Great realized that he would need to eliminate Ukrainian nationalism and the Cossaks in order to successfully control the region. Meanwhile, the Cossaks were acting more and more like a state when they passed the Constitution of Pylyp Orlyk. The Constitution was unique for the period because it recognized separation of powers and even an early attempt at democracy. In the 1760s and 1770s, all Cossak self-rule was abolished. In addition, Poland was partitioned between Austria, Russia, and Prussia, meaning all of Ukraine fell under Russian rule.

Meanwhile, the Crimean Kahnate began to fall as well and it was annexed as part of the Russian Empire in 1783.

After 1783, Russians began to settle in the areas that were once Crimea and southern Ukraine. The Tsars began a policy of Russification, which limited the use of the Ukrainian language and prohibited much of Ukraine's culture.

In the 1800's Ukrainian nationalism became a dominant force again. Let by the cultural elite, especially the National Poet Taras Shevchenko, ideas of romantic nationalism ensued. Russia and Austria (which also came to control small parts of Western Ukraine) largely ignored the country and did not explicitly prohibit nationalism. In 1917, as part of the Russian Revolution, Ukraine declared independence again. The new Ukrainian state, first a republic and then a socialist state, issued stamps but not coins.


Taras Shevchenko, "National Poet" of Ukraine

In 1921 and 1922 most of Ukraine become the Ukrainian SSR, part of the Soviet Union and had some autonomy. In addition, Western Ukraine became part of Poland and Bukovina was taken over by Romania. These areas had no autonomy. Finally, Carpathian Ruthenia was annexed by Czechoslovakia as an autonomous region. In Poland, there was a lot of conflict between the Polish Catholic Church and the Ukrainian Orthodox Church, and economic conditions were very bad. However, in Soviet Ukraine, they were much worse.



As part of the Soviet Union, Ukraine was heavily industrialized. In addition, private farms were taken over by the state. This meant that the government in Moscow was in charge of the food. They made unrealistic quotas for the Ukrainians and refused to give them any food until they were met. This resulted in the Holodomor, or Great Famine. Holodomor is usually described as a genocide against Ukrainians but not all scholars agree. The government used starvation as a punishment to force peasants into a Kolkhoz, or collective farms.



Following the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact, in which the Soviet Union and Nazi Germany agreed on how to divide Europe into Germany and Soviet parts, Germany invaded Poland. As promised, the Soviet Union also invaded Poland, and annexed the territories which were once part of Ukraine. They also took formerly Ukrainian parts of Czechoslovakia and Romania (peacefully) and annexed a small part of Romania (also peacefully).

June 22nd, 1941, was a fateful day for the Soviet Union. Wehrmacht soldiers, under the command of Walther von Brauchitsch invaded the USSR. The fascist invaders were initially very successful - one statistic says that for every German soldier that died, ten Soviet soldiers were killed.



However, WWII was not simply about military glory, as Soviet propaganda would lead you to believe. The effects of the war were most devastating in Ukraine, where 5 to 8 million people were killed. The Reichskommissariat Ukraine, a Fascist territory under direct control of the Germany army was established. This government was responsible for most of the deaths, including a tremendous amount of Jews who were simply removed from their homes and murdered as part of the Holocaust (unlike in Western Europe where the Holocaust was a long process). The brutal scars left by the invasion are still felt in Ukraine today.



When Ukraine was liberated in 1944-45, the struggle was not over. Nearly 1000 cities and 30000 villages were destroyed. A famine in 1946-47 only made the situation worse. However, by 1950, the industry in Ukraine began to recover. In 1953, when Nikita Khrushchev became the leader of the Soviet Union, cooperation between Ukraine and Russia was emphasized. In 1954, Crimea was returned to Ukraine, a territory from which thousands of Tatars were deported by Stalin just a few years earlier.

In 1986, the Chernobyl nuclear power plant exploded, resulting in the worst nuclear disaster ever. Even now, there is a massive amount of unusable land near Chernobyl, know as the zona vidchuzhennya​, the Chernobyl Exclusion Zone.



On July 16th, 1990, the Ukrainian SSR declared partial sovereignty. The next year, it declared independence. The new country produced coins denominated in Kopeks in 1992, and they are still being struck today, despite the fact that the currency was changed in 1996 (from karbovanets to hryvnia).


Also, some higher-denomination NCLTs were struck in karbovanetsiv:



Although there was corruption in government following independence, the economy grew steadily, especially after the currency change. The corruption culminated in 2004, when Prime Minister Viktor Yanukovych was declared the winner of the presidential elections, which had been rigged. The results caused a public protest in favor of the opposition candidate, Viktor Yushchenko, who opposed the outcome. This resulted in the peaceful Orange Revolution, bringing Viktor Yushchenko and Yulia Tymoshenko to power, while putting Viktor Yanukovych as the opposition.

Yanukovych returned to power in 2006, probably also through corruption. He began to cooperate more and more with Russia, which made much of the population, who view Ukraine as European, upset. In 2013, this culminated in the refusal of President Yanukovych to sign an agreement with the European Union, instead signing an agreement with Russia.

This enraged the people of Ukraine, especially students. They took the the streets in November 2013, and formed a protest in Maidan Nezalezhnosti, or simply "Maidan". A Twitter hashtag, #EuroMaidan (combing 'Europe' and 'Maidan') was set up and soon became the name of the protest.



Throughout the month of December, the government felt the need to crack down on the protests. Although they were being attacked, the protesters held their ground, and more and more joined their numbers. Eventually Maidan was full and could not accommodate any more protesters. Meanwhile, they formed self-defense units and built barricades to protect themselves. As the government special forces became more and more violent throughout the months of December and January, the media began to brodcast the protest scenes to the world. One news website, Kyiv Post, was producing new updates every few minutes by reporters "on the field".



By February, Kiev was in chaos. Police and hired thugs continued their attacks on the protesters, while protesters continued their defensive. At the end of the month, Kiev was in a state of emergency. Schools, public transportation, and much of the government were shut down. On February 22nd, Yanokovych fled and the government was deposed. The new provisional government signed the deal with Europe. However, at the same time, Russia invaded and annexed Crimea, and Donetsk and Luhansk declared Independence. Since then, Ukraine has been fighting rebels aided by the Russian army in Eastern Ukraine.

Euromaidan was commemorated by a Ukrainian coin:



Now, some extra stuff:



More on the origins of tryzub (trident) and its use on ancient coins - http://www.encyclopediaofukraine.com/display.asp?linkpath=pagesTRTrident.htm

The first documented mention of "ukraina" dates to the 1100s, literally meaning "the borderlands" between Russian duchies and Galicia-Volhynia. So, rather than saying "Note the presence of the tryzub, a symbol of Ukraine" (which did not exist in the times of Byzantium), it would be more accurate to say "Note the presence of tryzub, an ancient symbol whose use dates back to Kievan Rus and which modern-day Ukraine incorporated into its coat of arms".

Skipping to 20th century history... The First Ukrainian Front was named that for where the fighting took place, not because of the Soviet army's composition, which included just about every ethnicity living in USSR. To be honest, I don't see why you needed to include that paragraph at all, but since you did, you should probably paint a more complete picture and also mention Ukraine's other participants in WWII - the Waffen SS Galicia, made up of Ukrainian nationalists who fought on the German side and killed plenty of their own countrymen.

Crimea wasn't "returned" to Ukraine. It was never part of Ukraine before that and had been Russian from the time Russia defeated the Crimean Khanate, bringing an end to the Tatar's raiding and the slave-trade when hundreds of thousands of Slavs were sold to the Ottomans every year. What happened in 1954 is that Russia and Ukraine did a land swap, to make their territories more contiguous. Ukraine got Russia's Crimea and Russia got back some of the Russian lands in the east that were previously given to the Ukrainian SSR by Lenin.

ps: It's funny how many people are unaware of how Ukraine gained its territory throughout history, so I will leave you with this little picture as a reminder:
HoH
I figured you might want to debate some history with me. :D

Unfortunately debates like these end up deleted on Numista - so if you want we could debate a) by PM b) by email or c) on Facebook.
I really enjoy and learn form these World Coins Chat articles!

It is a great article, thank you dptashny! :-) Especially the focus on the coins, well done!

However, I must point out that once someone can´t be impartial, it gives room for other interpretations, valid as well.
The focus I seen in most articles is in the coinage and a brief overview of the changes within centuries or even in the recent years.
Unfortunately, when someone takes part of an opinion due to his personal story or beliefs, we enter in a blurred line and an endless loop of opinions, arguments and personal interpretations of historical facts, that it should be avoided. I understand Houseofham contribute stating that some paragraphs should had been avoided - as it lacks importance in what is related with coinage, and also because is subject to many other interpretations, that you obviously may have yours, but you should list as well others, and try somehow to balance in order to avoid criticism.
At least, it is somehow a academic rule when writing articles in this field.

Debating history is useless, as no-one will change their points of view, there are arguments from every side and truth is a gathering, not something that is certain. It is very sensitive... especially the last part (except the Euromaidan coin :-) ), sure you knew that other opinions against would arise.

Also, there are so many affordable interesting modern commemmorative Hryvnia coins not mentioned in the article, that you could picked up :-)

Anyway, thank you dptashny for the great article and also Houseofham previous post showing his point of view, with education and kindness on his explanation.
I am happy to debate my opinions - most of them come from the news/ articles I read rather than personal opinions. And while I'm sure Houseofham has strong opinions, what he is saying is still fact.

Don't mind the 1st Ukrainian Front comment - I got it from a Ukrainian nationalist so I was suspicious of it myself. I deleted it to be sure. :)

Everything else is open to debate though, I don't agree that you can't debate history.
Valiant attempt at what must be the most challenging part of the entire series.

For obvious reasons I don't think I'll touch the post WWII content but I have a few criticisms and questions about the earlier periods.

"Holodomor is usually described as a genocide against Ukrainians but not all scholars agree. "

Who are these "scholars" and what is the nature of their disagreement? I thought the use of famine to impose collectivism was well enough documented to be beyond question. I can't think of any reputable (non Soviet) historian who would contest the idea that Holomodor was a deliberate genocide inspired by Stalin.

"In 1386, Poland and Lithuania formed a dynastic union, and of course Ukraine became part of it."

Why "of course"? It would seem to me that the Ukraine's interests were historically best served by focusing their efforts around the Black Sea than by getting involved with alliances centered on the much less relevant (to Ukrainian interests) Baltic. Is there a piece of the jigsaw missing which might explain why this move is seen as inevitable?

"June 22nd, 1941, was a fateful day for the Soviet Union. Wehrmacht soldiers, under the command of Walther von Brauchitsch invaded the USSR. The fascist invaders were initially very successful...."

To describe the invaders as "Fascist" is to demonstrate a complete misunderstanding of National Socialism and Fascism, two distinct and separate philosophies. To term the Axis forces as Fascist or even Nazi would be rather like describing American units at Normandy as "Republicans". Outside of the Waffen SS the percentages of party members would be no more than that of the general population.
Non illegitimis carborundum est.  Excellent advice for all coins.
Make Numismatics Great Again!  
Quote: "pnightingale"​​"Holodomor is usually described as a genocide against Ukrainians but not all scholars agree. "

​Who are these "scholars" and what is the nature of their disagreement? I thought the use of famine to impose collectivism was well enough documented to be beyond question. I can't think of any reputable (non Soviet) historian who would contest the idea that Holomodor was a deliberate genocide inspired by Stalin.




During the civil war that followed the October 1917 revolution, Bolsheviks used their control of food supplies as a political tool. They would attract popular support by artificially creating food shortages in various areas of Russia and Russian protectorates and blaming it on the Mensheviks. Combined with mismanagement in storage and distribution of confiscated foods, this produced devastating results in Ukraine. As such, this policy did not aim to intentionally exterminate any specific group of people/ethnicity and thus cannot be referred to as genocide. Which is not to say it shouldn't be considered a war crime.
HoH
Phil - this is already the second time my post to you got lost when my computer crashed! And I almost finished writing a PM to HouseofHam but my computer crashed then also!

Holodomor - You just got one of those opinions from HouseofHam. There are a small minority of scholars who agree with him, although I personally don't!

Poland-Lithuania Dynastic Union - as I said a few sentences there was no Ukrainian state at the time, part of it belonged to Lithuania and part of it belonged to Poland. So of course, it became part of the union. :)

Fascist - Fine, maybe it was not the right word to use. "Nazi" probably would have been better. Regardless, I was talking about the army as a whole, rather than the personal views of individual soldiers. Germany at the time was "Nazi Germany"!

Maybe I should stop writing WCC topics if they are so controversial! ;) Anyway, you guys are lucky I didn't write Israel because otherwise we would be arguing for years!
Why are you young people so afraid of controversy?

Do you think we worried about being controversial when Mussolini bomber Pearl Harbour? No, we charged the Hun at the Somme and sent them packing back to France is what we did.

The problem with history is that since WWII it has been written by court historians who care nothing for the truth or even history, their role is to support a political orthodoxy. With one or two honorable exceptions (who have been actually jailed for not recycling the approved truth) anything published since the 1960's is a fabrication.

Sadly the average consumer of this insipid pabulum is far too dense to see it and believes that The History Channel is History.
Non illegitimis carborundum est.  Excellent advice for all coins.
Make Numismatics Great Again!  
Yes I agree with you. We live in the PC age unfortunately so too much is changed to avoid controversy!
Quote: "pnightingale"​The problem with history is that since WWII it has been written by court historians who care nothing for the truth or even history, their role is to support a political orthodoxy.

​That statement summed up the feelings I have had for sometime now.
Lol, I don't think anyone here is afraid of controversy, but we do have to keep in mind that moderators may close this thread at any moment. Personally, I would rather have controversy, hear multiple opinions, disagree and debate, than have just the 1 official point of view that everyone has to go by.

Holodomor -- Apparently, the small minority of scholars that share the view that I expressed are the ones who wrote the English Wikipedia article, because this is what it says: "If Soviet policies and actions were conclusively documented as intending to eradicate the rise of Ukrainian nationalism, they would fall under the legal definition of genocide." - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holodomor
HoH
I think it is really easy to say that the establishment is wrong, but then if you do that, it is your job to prove that claim, which is hard and takes work. Making loosely-defined accusations isn't "controversy", it's white noise.
I don't know who you're criticizing, but you're wrong no matter what. There is more than one "establishment" in this case and everyone is siding with one of them.
"I don't know what you're saying, but you're wrong." :O
HoH
Quote: "Houseofham"​"I don't know what you're saying, but you're wrong." :O
​No, I'm saying he's wrong regardless.
Lovely "read" indeed, but no "write" on my side
... sorry to say that, but for me these things are so f...ng obvious, that , I rather offer you to have a question, than go into post-Soviet evaluation of who's who in the zoo...
Almost all my family died because of Holodomor, so I do know for sure that it was an organized crime against Ukrainian people. Yes, a genocide.
ROMAE AETERNAE
Quote: "Houseofham"​Crimea wasn't "returned" to Ukraine. It was never part of Ukraine before that and had been Russian from the time Russia defeated the Crimean Khanate, bringing an end to the Tatar's raiding and the slave-trade when hundreds of thousands of Slavs were sold to the Ottomans every year. What happened in 1954 is that Russia and Ukraine did a land swap, to make their territories more contiguous.


​Before 1991, Crimea was a part of the countries - Russian Empire, then USSR - that included both Russia and Ukraine as subdivisions. So you are right that it was never part of Ukraine as a separate country, but also it was never part of Russia as a separate country. From XVIII century till 1991 the Crimea was both Russian and Ukrainian.
Quote: "ciscoins"
Quote: "Houseofham"​Crimea wasn't "returned" to Ukraine. It was never part of Ukraine before that and had been Russian from the time Russia defeated the Crimean Khanate, bringing an end to the Tatar's raiding and the slave-trade when hundreds of thousands of Slavs were sold to the Ottomans every year. What happened in 1954 is that Russia and Ukraine did a land swap, to make their territories more contiguous.

​​Before 1991, Crimea was a part of the countries - Russian Empire, then USSR - that included both Russia and Ukraine as subdivisions. So you are right that it was never part of Ukraine as a separate country, but also it was never part of Russia as a separate country. From XVIII century till 1991 the Crimea was both Russian and Ukrainian.

From 1783, when it was annexed, to 1917 (the Bolshevik Revolution), Crimea was part of the Russian Empire (otherwise known simply as Russia), which had a completely different system of administrative units, not based along ethnic lines, called guberniya (governorate). The territory of what later became the Ukrainian SSR is comprised of what had previously been (parts of) several governorates. You can find a list of these, along with a map, here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_governorates_of_the_Russian_Empire

In particular, Crimea was part of the Tavricheskaya Guberniya/Taurida Governorate. Here, I quote from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taurida_Governorate :

"In 1917 the governorate was split, with most of its peninsular part forming the Crimean People's Republic [formed 13 December 1917], less the city of Sevastopol which remained the main naval base of the Black Sea Fleet of the Russian Republic, while the rest became part of Ukrainian People's Republic [precursor of the Ukrainian SSR]."

For a very short time prior to the formation of the Soviet Union, there was even a Taurida SSR, officially recognized by the Russian SSR/RSFSR as a sovereign nation, but it only lasted for a month and a half before falling to civil war unrest.

Once things had settled down a bit, the Crimean PR became the Crimean Autonomous SSR within Russia on October 18, 1921.

Soviet Union was formed on 29 December 1922, with the Ukrainian SSR officially joining it on 30 December.

In 1945, the autonomous SSR was dissolved and Crimea became a region within the Russian SSR. In 1954, per the terms of the landswap between the Russian SSR and the Ukrainian SSR, Crimea passed to the latter.
HoH
I do not really get these discussions. Crimea was part of Ukraine, until Russia occupied and then anexed it in March 2014.

There is really no point discussing where it was before xxxx, how it was handled in xxxx and so on. Talks on whether it was returned and so on are part of 19th and first half 20th century thinking. Something that was supposed to be long gone.
Catalogue administrator
Yes, and we're all supposed to be nice to each other and no one should ever break the law, let alone start wars. But the truth of life is that these things do happen and have to be dealt with. That means talking about them, listening to all sides, and examining the facts in order to come up with a solution.

"Those who forget history are doomed to repeat it."
HoH
Quote: "Houseofham"​Yes, and we're all supposed to be nice to each other and no one should ever break the law, let alone start wars. But the truth of life is that these things do happen and have to be dealt with. That means talking about them, listening to all sides, and examining the facts in order to come up with a solution.

​"Those who forget history are doomed to repeat it."
​True.

Even if we can't come up with a solution we can still form an opinion. World events are important to everyone. Freedoms are so fragile they can be affected by events thousands of miles away like the butterfly's wings.

A well informed citizenry is the best weapon against evil men and now I reckon, women too.
Non illegitimis carborundum est.  Excellent advice for all coins.
Make Numismatics Great Again!  
I found it interesting that this word "maidan" exists in Ukrainian (or is it also in russian?). In Hindi, the word means "open ground"...in Bombay you have several of them ....Azad Maidan, Oval Maidan, August Kranti Maidan and a few others, all that were assembly areas for political activism against the British in the late 19th and early half of the 20th century. These days they are used for run-of-the-mill political rallies or just to play cricket/football
Outings administrator
In Czech, there is a word mejdan, meaning "a party" (which can be outdoors.)
Catalogue administrator
Quote: "ashlobo"​I found it interesting that this word "maidan" exists in Ukrainian (or is it also in russian?). In Hindi, the word means "open ground"...in Bombay you have several of them ....Azad Maidan, Oval Maidan, August Kranti Maidan and a few others, all that were assembly areas for political activism against the British in the late 19th and early half of the 20th century. These days they are used for run-of-the-mill political rallies or just to play cricket/football
​I've never heard it in Russian until the events that took place in Ukraine. The word itself is borrowed from Persian میدان (field/plaza).
HoH
Quote: "Houseofham"
Quote: "ashlobo"​I found it interesting that this word "maidan" exists in Ukrainian (or is it also in russian?). In Hindi, the word means "open ground"...in Bombay you have several of them ....Azad Maidan, Oval Maidan, August Kranti Maidan and a few others, all that were assembly areas for political activism against the British in the late 19th and early half of the 20th century. These days they are used for run-of-the-mill political rallies or just to play cricket/football
​​
​​I've never heard it in Russian until the events that took place in Ukraine. The word itself is borrowed from Persian میدان (field/plaza).
​Makes sense, I guess that Ukrainian has some influence from the Crimean Khaganate (and therefore persian?). Hindi is heavily influenced by Persian (as is also Urdu of course)
Outings administrator
Quote: "Houseofham"​​​I've never heard it in Russian until the events that took place in Ukraine. The word itself is borrowed from Persian میدان (field/plaza).


​​ ​I heard it in an old song but didn't understand its meaning. Dictionaries say that this word is in use in Ukraine and in southern regions of Russia as a synonym of a square.
Quote: "ciscoins"
Quote: "Houseofham"​​​I've never heard it in Russian until the events that took place in Ukraine. The word itself is borrowed from Persian میدان (field/plaza).
​​

​​​ ​I heard it in an old song but didn't understand its meaning. Dictionaries say that this word is in use in Ukraine and in southern regions of Russia as a synonym of a square.
​A town square (майдан (maidan) in Ukrainian, площадь (ploschad) in Russian) - open area in the heart of the town used for community gatherings.
Quote: "Declan"​​​A town square (майдан (maidan) in Ukrainian, площадь (ploschad) in Russian) - open area in the heart of the town used for community gatherings.



​Майдан (maidan) in Ukrainian is not an exact synonym of площадь (ploschad) in Russian. In Russia all city squares are called площадь. And in Ukraine the most common name for a city square is площа (ploscha); also, there's a word плац (platz) for the same purpose. As far as I know, there's only one maidan in all Kiev - the Independence square.
Quote: "ciscoins"
Quote: "Declan"​​​A town square (майдан (maidan) in Ukrainian, площадь (ploschad) in Russian) - open area in the heart of the town used for community gatherings.



​​Майдан (maidan) in Ukrainian is not an exact synonym of площадь (ploschad) in Russian. In Russia all city squares are called площадь. And in Ukraine the most common name for a city square is площа (ploscha); also, there's a word плац (platz) for the same purpose. As far as I know, there's only one maidan in all Kiev - the Independence square.
​I do not agree with you, as mostly all big Ukrainian cities have a big town square known as майдан (maidan). You can see maidan in Lutsk, Rivne, Kharkiv, Ivano-Frankivsk, Terrnopil, and others cities. As I know, ploschad is more common for the Eastern part of Ukrainian, while maidan for the Western part. However, I do not know a difference between maidan and ploschad (as all the cities above have both of these places).

» Forum policy

Used time zone is UTC+1:00.
Current time is 13:04.