Fire of fuel tank kills 123 people in Pakistan - TVWorld June 25, 7:58
Muslims worldwide celebrate Eid al-FitrSociety & Culture June 25, 5:18
Mexico knocks out Russia from FIFA Confederations Cup with 2-1 win in KazanSport June 24, 19:59
Putin visits Crimean youth camp ArtekSociety & Culture June 24, 19:42
Conflict around Qatar should be settled by diplomatic means - source at Foreign MinistryRussian Politics & Diplomacy June 24, 16:44
More than 237,000 fans attend Confederations Cup matches already - Deputy PM MutkoSport June 24, 15:03
Sistema's president hopes for dialogue with Rosneft on settlement agreementBusiness & Economy June 24, 14:56
CNN deletes article about meeting between Scaramucci and Russian Direct Investment FundWorld June 24, 13:12
Ukrainian Army units shell Donetsk Republic in first hours of newceasefireWorld June 24, 5:19
MOSCOW, December 25 (Itar-Tass) - Russian and Ukrainian historians have found a consensus on ancient Rus’ foundation and role, the Director of the Institute of World History of the Russian academy of Sciences (RAS), co-chairman of the joint commission Alexander Chubaryan, told a press conference at Itar-Tass.
“We surely have some sore points left,” he said speaking of the last day of the meeting Kiev hosted recently. “On two of the issues we have reached a certain consensus, primarily the foundation of ancient Rus.” The historians have found a mutually acceptable formula - the state was a historical space where the three civilizations overlapped - future Russia, Ukraine and Belarus.
The historian added that long-term disagreements here were due to the fact “the Ukrainian colleagues considered Kievan Rus the cradle of the Ukrainian nation”. According to the accepted point of view, “the ancient Rus state had several centres: Kiev, Novgorod and Moscow”.
Another subject of heated debates smoothed away is the Pereyaslav Rada (assembly) of 1654 that heralded reunification of Russia and Ukraine. Different points of view persisted in this issue, Chubaryan said, but they were no longer as acute as ten years ago. One fact that helped ease the tension was the publication of Hetman Bohdan Khmelnytsky’s correspondence in Ukraine.
Accepting different points of view in joint work did not “obstruct cooperation”, Chubaryan said, adding more emphasis was now made on publishing documents and promoting historians’ work in both countries’ archives.