Talk:Scottish Russians

Aim of this article?

This article lists various people with Scottish and Russian connections and various people with Irish and Russian connections. Some may actually be in some sense Scotch Irish but most, or possibly all, are not. Why are they being lumped in together? Mutt Lunker (talk) 23:37, 12 October 2017 (UTC)

@Mutt Lunker:I guess because there are Scotch-Irish Americans and Scotch-Irish Canadians. However in their context Scotch-Irish means something else, not Scots + Irish. Therefore I was going to suggest article split, but got distracted. I guess your "Why are they" means you would support the idea of splitting, no? Staszek Lem (talk) 01:09, 13 October 2017 (UTC)

Dear colleague @Mutt Lunker: You can find that people of Scottish origin leave a significant point in Russian culture and history, so I suppose it have to be on wiki. From the reasons mentioned above by colleague @Staszek Lem: Im lumped them in together. Of course, mostly it was Scots, so actually I’m not sure if they have to be all together. There was some Irish since 1600th, but as You can see, not in such a numbers as Scots. Regards, (talk)

Nobody argues against wikipedia writing about Irish and Scots in Russia. We say that you should not have lumped them together and the title is misleading. The article must be split. Staszek Lem (talk) 22:19, 13 October 2017 (UTC)

Dear @Staszek Lem:, that's absolutely clear it has to be done in separate, give me just a little more time for reorganization of this article. Best regards, Kravtz (talk)

Clarification needed

I'm unclear as to the meaning and relevance of the sentence "During the Polish–Russian War (1605–18) the regiment under the command of Wilim Grim, later captain-rittmeister Jacob Shaw switched sides and in 1614 left the fortress of Bely to join under Russian control." Was Grim Scottish? Did command later move to Shaw and was he Scottish? If not, what is the pertinence to this article? What side was the regiment on initially and which side did they change to? Did the regiment leave Bely to put themselves under Russian command or did they retreat from Bely, leaving it under Russian control? Mutt Lunker (talk) 13:30, 18 October 2017 (UTC)

The regiment was raised in Scotland and the other companie was of Irish. The soldies were commanded by Grim (Scottish) and later unite was placed under the command of captain-rittmeister Jacob Shaw (Scottish). At the beginning of War the regiment was in service of Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth, but during the siege of Belaya in 1614 regiment switched sides, surrendered the fortress and completely join russian service. Kravtz (talk)

Please can you add this to the article so it is clear? If he was Scottish, presumably Grim's name was William, not "Wilim"? Mutt Lunker (talk) 14:22, 18 October 2017 (UTC)

Yes, sure. The problem is that in Russian documents from that time names were always written in different transcriptions. Kravtz (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 14:29, 18 October 2017 (UTC)

I do have some grasp of Cyrillic script - could you paste the relevant quotation or quotations of his name here? I'm wondering if he may have been a Graham rather than a "Grim" (the former is a very common surname, the latter not). Mutt Lunker (talk) 14:55, 18 October 2017 (UTC)

Due to Russain State Archive of Ancient Acts, his name was Willim Grim (Вилим Грим in Russian). In petition of praporshchik Davyd Advoretz's widow, its mention that her housband was in the battle of Smolemsk with Wilim Grimam (c Вилимам Гримам), so probably yes, you are right due to from of declension. Kravtz (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 15:33, 18 October 2017 (UTC)

Aren't we doing original research here? Interpreting primary sources as to correct spelling of a name and identifying the person is the job of a reseacrher, not wikipedian. Staszek Lem (talk) 16:37, 18 October 2017 (UTC)

I dont think so, actually. РГАДА is a primary source thats for sure, but about interpretation of original transcription and whatnot is for discussion. Any way in article it's mentioned in original sound, so its seems to be correct. Kravtz (talk) 18:56, 18 October 2017 (UTC)

Hopefully and if we are lucky, we may be on the scent of further sources which indicate his Scottish name as rendered in its original form though if we don't track them down, obviously we shouldn't add speculations to the article itself. I've a book in mind which may mention him; I'll see if I can track it down. The spelling from the source in Cyrillic is as it is, so not original research and it would be valid to put a Latin transliteration in the article with that Cyrillic rendering after it in brackets: "'Vilimam Grimam' (Вилимам Гримам)". Kravtz, the sources do state that he is Scots, don't they? Mutt Lunker (talk) 16:58, 18 October 2017 (UTC)

He was definitely Scots, cause it was Scottish native regiment. He was mentioned is several letters and finance book (Приходно-расходная книга Разряда). With our ancestor it's absolutely the same, due to the genealogical tale his name was Dunagh Mangarmov, and due to Russain State Archive of Ancient Acts (РГАДА, Ф. 210) his name was Danagh Makgamory/Maknamory. Kravtz (talk) 19:27, 18 October 2017 (UTC)

@Mutt Lunker:, if you like, I can try to find some more detailed science papers with references about those military units in Russian, but that should take some time, cause Im not the full Russian native speaker. Regards, Kravtz (talk) 19:41, 18 October 2017 (UTC)

Thanks for the offer but my Russian doesn't extend very far past familiarity with the alphabet and the most basic of words and phrases. I'm fine with transliterations but I'd be struggling to make much sense of a text as a whole. Mutt Lunker (talk) 18:32, 18 October 2017 (UTC)

"the genalogical tale", i.e., a hearsay, is not valid reference in wikipedia. And you are giving a yet another spelling of the name. Wikipedia is not a place for genealogical legends about your ancestors. Unless you provide reliable secondary sources, all information based "letters and finance book" and other primary sources is out, sorry. Staszek Lem (talk) 17:22, 20 October 2017 (UTC)

If material in the article is personal interpretations of genealogical records and archive material, I have similar concerns. Mutt Lunker (talk) 18:54, 20 October 2017 (UTC)

Okey colleagues, that's quite clear about usage of historical documents (primary sources) as sole references. But I thought that if it's at least partly presented on internet by State Archives that's fine and it could be presented in articles? Kravtz (talk) 12:40, 21 October 2017 (UTC)

P.S. And what about connected contribution? You are kidding me, massive information exists on influence of Scots on Russia especially in times of Peter the Great. That's not serious at all :)

P.P.S. The "genealogical tale" is the most typical mention of ancestors in Archive Acts about noble titles if we tolk about nobility in Imperial Russia. "Finance book" its official documents about personal material benefits to each soldier from foreign volunteer units in Russian service, and it's extremely important for researchers. I can publish several original facsimile of these documents from Archives but due to WP:PRIMARY its have no sense for Wiki, if I'm right? Anyway it's up to you how to classificate importance of information sources. Regards, Kravtz (talk) 15:35, 21 October 2017 (UTC)

References