Talk:Alexander Suvorov

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search


Hello, Paranoid. =) ""Do you, by any chance, have a source that would indicate which meaning of "kosa" is the correct one for Suvorov's quote? The reason I'm asking is that I'm Russian, I've encountered that quote before and, though I've seen no hard evidence either way, "scythe" seemed to be the accepted meaning.

The current translation is correct. Kosa in this phrase refers to the braid in a wig. The word braid fits perfectly with pudra (facial and wig powder) and bukli (pl. from buklia or puklia, curl in a wig), while scythe does not fit at all.
You can sign and timestamp your posts by typing four tildas: ~~~~
--Gene s 07:47, 16 Nov 2004 (UTC)

For those wondering what this is all about, the noun "kosa" has more than one meaning in Russian - to wit:
1. A plait/braid (of hair)
2. A scythe
3. A spit (geographical - a small piece of land, i.e. sand or gravel, running into a body of water

Move to Alexander Suvorov[edit]

The name should be properly transliterated as Alexander, as per Transliteration of Russian into English. To avoid confusion, Aleksandr and Aleksander should also be mentioned in the article as possible variants.

This article has been renamed as the result of a move request. violet/riga (t) 09:42, 20 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Removing "alleged" massacre[edit]

The Massacre of Praga is a well-documented historical fact and calling it "alleged" is simply a factual error. The sentence "the alleged massacre of many civillians broke the spirits of the defenders" makes no sense anyway - if it never happened, how could it have broken their spirits? I'm removing the word.

The Massacre of Praga is one of many Polish nationalist myths. In any case virtually nothing about this conflict is "well documented", murders of civilians obviosly did happened, but they weren't on an exeptional scale according to 18th century European standarts. Famous Polish painting does not qualify as a "factual document"...(Fisenko 05:58, 29 August 2005 (UTC))

I'm not here to argue about this, since I'm just reporting what I thought was obvious. I see there's controversy though, and I don't want to make this into a nationalist edit war. A line about controversy between Polish and Russian historians on whether a massacre occurred and its scope would probably be more NPOV, however, than the unfortunate term "alleged" which suggests outright that it did not happen. Guildenstern42 14:09, 16 September 2005 (UTC)

It is just an accident, that I am involved into this debate because the article title Massacre of Praga seemed odd to me. I quickly checked and I found no references to the Battle of Warsaw called this way in entire E.L. internet as well as in any E.L. encyclopedias. I have too little knowledge on the topic to argue whether the massacre did in fact happened and I do believe that in Poland it is considered to be beyond debate. However, since "Massacre of Praga" is not an accepted term in English L. literature for these events, we should not use it simply to refer to somethinng as if it is a common name. Therefore, I just moved the Massacre of Praga to the Battle of Praga. Similar solution should be used here. We of course should mention the mass murder of civilians, since it is widely considered to be factual. --Irpen 05:59, 17 September 2005 (UTC)

The article and neutrality[edit]

The article states that the massacre of civilians in Warsaw is alledged.However historians and history doesn't dispute the fact of the massacre. --Molobo 10:28, 29 December 2005 (UTC)

Polish historians, you forget to say. Bug off, troll. --Ghirla | talk 10:31, 29 December 2005 (UTC)

Please stick to Civility on Wiki. --Molobo 10:37, 29 December 2005 (UTC)

I don't feed trolls. Go away. --Ghirla | talk 10:38, 29 December 2005 (UTC)
Ghirla, please behave. Molobo has a perfectly good point here. Google Books search for "1794+Praga+massacre" reveals 18 books, most of then not written by people with Polish sounding surname, with phrases like: "[Suvorov's] assault resulted in the infamous “massacre of Praga” on 24 October/ 4 November" (John T. Alexander), "...would massacre zo,ooo Pales in the storming of Praga in 1794..." (John. P Ledonne), " stormed Praga on November 4, 1794, a success which was followed by an appalling massacre of its inhabitants" (Charles Raymond Beazley), ..."Eighteen thousand human carcasses were carried away after the massacre..." (James Mackintosh). Now could you provide any sources, preferably not-Russian and in English (since you discard Polish ones and by Polish sounding authors) that argue the massacre is alleged?--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus Talk 14:19, 29 December 2005 (UTC)
My search discovered 254 entries for "praga+battle" as opposed to 85 entries for "praga+massacre", the large portion of the "massacre" citations belonging to the Poles - Andrzej Szczypiorski, Czeslaw Milosz, etc. Others were obviously influenced by their unsubstantiated claims. I'll let the matter pass however, until I have more time to ascertain the truth. --Ghirla | talk 15:49, 29 December 2005 (UTC)
Note that some of those 257 battle references are about the 1944 Warsaw Uprising.--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus Talk 21:24, 29 December 2005 (UTC)

If the object of Suvorov was to massacre, he could have unleashed the cossacks upon the city and ordered them to massacre. He could've added his own troops, not just the Cossacks, and his troops were extremely loyal to him. The casualties then would have been much higher then 20,000. Like five times higher. If there's a dispute, why not use common sense? You have well-armed and well-trained men versus recently defeated civilians. And in the massacre they can't at least kill five each? What're they slacking off? And you shouldn't be looking for Praga Battle vs. Praga Massacre, as Praga is not an English term. We call it Prague. For Prague Battle the Google Test showed 2,800k hits, whereas for the Prague Massacre it's only 449k hits. That's more then six times less! So it should be Prague Battle. Also, Wikipedia often uses the Google test, and as good wikipedians we must adhere to it. As per Molobo, he's quite infamous for his attacks on Russian history, and although he's being civil in this article, I can see why Ghirla would call him a troll. And I'm Californian, hence the only one here who doesn't have a national bias. User:ABCXYZ

For all your lack of national bias, you make up for it with ignorance, Praga is nowhere near Prague. Well aware this is 5 years old now, but just had to give my two cents. Also, I would like to point out in defence of the phrase "alleged massacre" (and for my national bias, I'm Scot-French-Canadian), alleged does not suggest that it did not happen, simply that proof is inconclusive, similar to alleged massive army of Grand Duke Jogaila at Grunwald/Tannenburg, which was quoted by the Germans as being "so large there is no number in human language to count them". Some people even think the Templars outnumbered the Poles/Lithuanians there. In defense of a massacre, 20000 is quite alot of civilians to die before bombs had more range than your throw. The bombing of Dresden (major German city) in 45 only average out at 30000, when it had over 1 million people in it. Warsaw on the other hand had a population of 120000 in 1792, 20000 being 1/6th, thats alot for a mere suburb. Durak. (talk) 09:01, 26 September 2010 (UTC)

Neutrality, in this article?? The whole thing reads like it was written by Suvorov's personal PR department. -- (talk) 18:28, 18 May 2012 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk)

non-notable statue[edit]

Image of a statue considered not notable by both romanians and russians. Moved from the original site of the battle of the Rimna river, on a hill, from political reasons and in order to be visited easily by russians tourists during communist era. It very courious that this ugly monument,a not notable monument (as an author of the article mentioned) situated in Romania has only a inscription in russian, and has escaped the any demolish or hidding (it was previosly situated out of sight near the river)attempt. It is very possible that some russians officials consider this monument a notable monument, but probable this is only a temporary situation.:-)CristianChirita

Indeed a relatively ugly statue. I think a free-use photo of the Suvorov statue in Izmail might be useful, though, if anyone has one. Jbhood 15:39, 9 July 2006 (UTC)

Suvorov orders during the Praga massacre[edit]

Reading the recent Irpen's addition about him ordering the destruction of the bridge, I am reminded about something I read some time ago: that he didn't order the massacre and actually issued orders to prevent it, but the troops were out of control (looting and pillaging was common in such conflicts). It is possible I am confusing him and this massacre with some other, though - but if sb can find references to his activities and orders during the siege of Warsaw, it might be a useful addition.--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus Talk 22:45, 28 March 2006 (UTC)

Actually I read a source once which claimed he took part in the massacre and grabbed two chickens while laughing to Russian soldiers "let only those have their heads left to their bodies". I will search for this source.

- --Molobo 07:42, 29 March 2006 (UTC)

A Russian reference from 1884 regarding Poland which was occupied at the time by Russia can't be seen as objective. --Molobo 03:09, 29 March 2006 (UTC)

[1] This source claims Russians have tried to cover up the massacre by either trying to portay it as justice against Poles or claims that Suvorov wanted to help Poles. --Molobo 15:27, 29 March 2006 (UTC)

{{troll}}--Ghirla -трёп- 06:56, 29 March 2006 (UTC)

  • While indeed reminding the Wikipedia policy may be useful, please use the newly recreated template sparingly as it can easily be interpreted as a Personal attack. I have nominated it for TfD. abakharev 15:35, 29 March 2006 (UTC)
    • I want also to remind everybody to avoid editing other editor's comments, even if they are seen as untrue and potentially offensive. The exceptions are direct personal attacks, racial, ethnic slurs, etc. In all other cases editing other people's comments can be seen as a vandalism. I doubt the truthfulness of the Molobo's legend, but have no reasons to believe it was told in a bad faith. abakharev 16:05, 29 March 2006 (UTC)

What's dubious?[edit]

Why are some users adding dubious tag to the existing reference without even commenting upon it here?

From my talk page[edit]

I would like your explanation on deletion of referenced source in Alexander Suvorov article. You made no comment why it was deleted. --Molobo 08:28, 6 April 2006 (UTC)

Please explain your deletions. Information shall be restored as soon as possible. --Molobo 09:40, 6 April 2006 (UTC)

OK, I have reverted the following edit: . I actually thought that presenting information of an unattributed and unpublished Word file as an academic source proving something to be a fact and a book of 1884 as an example of works the intentions of Modern Russian historians to be a kind of joke. If I am mistaken and it was serious, please explain it on talk abakharev 02:55, 7 April 2006 (UTC)
pl:Iskry is a major Polish publishing house, and I would not call their publications a joke. On the other hand it would be much better if Molobo could give us information on which book this fragment is a part of, who is the author, perhaps some reviews and such.--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus Talk 04:05, 7 April 2006 (UTC)

From the book : Janusz TazbirPolacy na Kremlu i inne historyje Professor Janusz Tazbir is a very respectable historian and you can view his profile here: --Molobo 09:13, 7 April 2006 (UTC)

Per this: Plese find objective resources, the book you quote can't be seen as objective as it represents Polish POV, and we need to cross examine its claims, as it is known Polish historians are quite paranoid towards Imperial Russia and their statements could be biased. Can you find an non-Polish source claiming the same fact ? --Ghirla -трёп- 09:30, 7 April 2006 (UTC)
Do you have any basis for questioning Janusz Tazbir other than his nationality? Tazbir is one of the most respected modern Polish historians, quoted in 151 books in Google Print.--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus Talk 14:03, 7 April 2006 (UTC)

Hmm most Polish historians are quite objective really. Where did you get that idea ? If you are adressing my opinion on Orthodoxy sources-well I would like some more info since Orthodoxy believes itself persecuted by Catholics, which leads to some absurdities-for example to demolition of flawed building used by Russian troops who left Warsaw as sign of persecution of Orthodox faith. But please adress that in other articles. --Molobo 09:45, 7 April 2006 (UTC)

The fragment comes from that book: Janusz Tazbir, Polacy na Kremlu i inne historyje (Poles on Kreml and other stories), Iskry, 2005, ISBN 8320717957. Tazbir is a perfectly rebutable source, and the fact that we have a fragment online only makes it better.--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus Talk 22:40, 28 April 2006 (UTC)

Memoirs of Czartoryski ?[edit]

This is very unreliable, Czartoryski was a foreign minister of Russia who tried to become ruler of Poland by being a servant of tsar. Please use reliable sources. Btw why are Pushking quotes delete d and information about Russian attempts to justify or cover up the mass murder ? --Molobo 12:23, 7 April 2006 (UTC)

Well, Czartoryski might have his own POV - who doesn't - but his memoires, as many others, are a primary source. In the end all modern books have to be based on the older, usually much more POVed sources - otherwise we are dealing with fiction. The trick is, when using old sources, to be able to NPOV them.--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus Talk 17:29, 10 April 2006 (UTC)

Storm in a teacup[edit]

I went over 10 English book that mention the battle of Praga (and please note that most of them do indeed use the term massacre). Not a single one of them contain clear reference that Suvorov either encouraged or tried to prevent massacre. They often use the geround construction 'Suvorov massacred...' but I think it is fairly obvious that they mean 'Suvorov forces massacred...' and not that Suvorov himself was anywhere near the frontlines slaying Poles. Considering that we currently have no references for the claim that Suvorov instigated the massacre, and the counterclaims are supported by the 19th century Russian source and some webpage, I'd suggest that both claims are moved to talk until we can find any proper, academic and preferably English citations for Suvorov's role in the massacre.--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus Talk 23:03, 28 April 2006 (UTC)

Suvorov's Armenian ancestory[edit]

I have became a connection link between two parties User:Eupator and User:Eliweinerman. Eli insists that the Armenian ancestory of Suvorov is an Urbam legend. On the other hand Eupator isnsists that Suvorov is clearly half-Armenian.

From my talk page:

Hello Alex, I still think the wording is unencyclopedic and it's better not to mention it at all if it is unsourced. Basically if it isn't verified 100% percent leave it out. Yeah Manuk is an Armenian name but that doesn't mean anyone with the name is Armenian? Мать Суворова — Авдотья (Евдокия) Федосеевна Суворова, в девичестве Манукова, происходила из обрусевшего армянского рода. Sources: [2], [3], [4]--Eupator 15:28, 1 June 2006 (UTC)

Eli's arguments are sent to me via E-mail, basically it referes to the genalogy of Manukov's that appear to be Russian nobility. Similar argument between the two is also about the ancestory of Mikhail Lazarev.

Please discuss your points on the talk pages. abakharev 06:16, 18 June 2006 (UTC)

No argument regarding Mikhail Lazarev. He is indeed not related to Armenian Lazarevs. Point about Suvorov still remains and there are sufficient sources for that.--Eupator 13:44, 1 July 2006 (UTC)

All I have to say is that the Russian version is not the totally right one: it is said there that his mother's surname 'Manukova' resembles the Armenian surname 'Manukian' or 'Manukyan' ('y' or 'i' depending on the spelling of the English version). It's hilarious!!! We know that in the times of the Russian Empire many people of non-Russian ethnic origin had to change their surnames to Russian ones or at least to have Russian suffixes 'ov' or 'ev' etc. That is how many surnames, such as 'Melikov', 'Gazarov', 'Melkonov', 'Arakelov', 'Manukov' and others appeared. So it is at least not just to say that 'Manukov' resembles 'Manukian'! What is more the word 'Manuk' is absolutely Armenian, it means 'child' and there are many famous people with this surname in the world, all of whom are Armenian. Finally, saying that not all people with surnames containing the word 'Manuk' are Armenians is just like saying that not all 'Chan's are Chinese or not all 'Ackerman's are Jews. Have you ever seen a non-Armenian 'Manukian' or 'Manukov'? Think wisely, please, and do not spread this anti-Armenian propaganda.

No offense, but it sounds like nationalist nonsense, not anti-Armenian propaganda. Your final points are even flawed, is Robert E. Lee therefore Chinese? Am I a liar because one of my middle names is Logan (a older russian word for liar is lgun). There are such things in this world as coincidence, and given that, you cannot state a definitive without definitive proof. Suvorov may have been Armenian, but theres no proof or sources, (and a suspect that even when those links worked they were unreliable sources, talking about the name and not about Suvorov at all). Lastly, Ackerman isn't even Jewish, its Saxon. Many duraks on this page. (talk) 09:09, 26 September 2010 (UTC)
The Russian version of Suvorov clearly states that the Armenian heritage is an urban myth and comes from misunderstanding that his mother was Armenian yet i was surprised to see that Armenian heritage to be mentioned here where in Russian its clearly not mentioned or even given much importance.I don't understand why Armenians have this fetish to Armenize everyone. (talk) 12:36, 25 October 2015 (UTC)

Importance rating[edit]

Assigned importance=high (same rating as the Elder Moltke, I would say) Jbhood 18:32, 9 July 2006 (UTC)

Bayonet quote[edit]

Any source for the translation: "A bullet will fool it, a bayonet won't say 'nyet'?" A clumsy translation at best, in my opinion. I'll revert it in a couple of days if no-one gives a reason not to. Jbhood 13:15, 5 August 2006 (UTC)

Agreed. He actually said diffferent.--Nixer 18:31, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

OK, done. Jbhood 12:15, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

Quote was deleted, now restored. Please give a reason if editing or deleting it again. Jbhood 10:12, 29 August 2006 (UTC)

Of course, if he were writing today Suvorov might say something like: "...the bayonet is a baaaad dude". Jbhood 12:11, 29 August 2006 (UTC)

You translated much more clumsy, dude. I just wanted Suvorov's name to be known to English speakers.

Oh, dear. Well, I think this is a significant quote, and should stay in in any case. Do you have any other proposal? Jbhood 17:21, 29 August 2006 (UTC)

Let me try this again. I am sorry that I used the word "clumsy". All the same, I think there must be a better translation of this quotation. Jbhood 17:39, 29 August 2006 (UTC)


So, no one here has read Duffy's book about Suvorov and his Italian campaign (Eagles Over the Alps)? It seems to be pretty well done, and he also briefly addresses Praga. Seems like a glaring ommission among the "further reading" section at least. Once I finish the work, I may add some detail to the Italian campaign section. (salamander, don't feel like signing on right now) -- 13:10, 17 October 2006 (UTC)


i cant beleive there is no mention of the atoll in the cook islands named after this man. can someone amend this wiki?> —The preceding unsigned comment was added by (talk) 05:40, 20 January 2007 (UTC).

Thousand face man name Aleksandr Vasiljevits Suvorov[edit]

Dear Participants. Something do not fit at all in this history. Here we see again what lack of knowledge of other languages than English and Russian means. Many important things from Aleksandr Vasiljevits life are totally missing from this history. There are in several Finnish sources clear mentions that Suvorov was a Finnish, not of Russian origin. One even says, published in countrys leading newspaper few years ago, that his original name was not Suvorov. He translated it to Russian when he entered into service at age of 12. His roots are said to come from Novgorod Karelian family, whose ancestors have been traced from Finnish church books in Savo in middle of Finland. And this he had said to many,including Catherine the Great who summed it in her answer "What about it. I have born in Germany". Sometimes during the later half of 1600 ie. after 1650 the family moved to Ingermanland. And later from Ingermanland to Novgorod. There is one fact which support this. Suvorov could not speak during his whole lifetime fluent Russian, he spoke it with Karelian dialect. He spoke Finnish with Karelian dialect. All these are proven facts. This history mentions that Suvorov served in Finland only during 1742-1743 war against Sweden. But after that he spent a year in Finland in words of Russian historian Timisheko-Rubanin writing in 1913: He (Suvorov) received order personally from Carherine to go to Finland to inspect the Russian garrisons in border area after Gustav III had made his "coup d`etat" in Sweden on August 19,1772. And so he did. He travelled without his uniform, dressed to like Finnish peasant and slept overnights in Finnish peasant houses. How could this be possible if he could not speak Finnish? Suvorov wrote in Finnish (po tshuhonski) his notes of the condition of Russian garrisons. He also reported to Catherine of the feelings of ordinary people in Finland which shows that he spent time also in Swedish part of Finland. Suvorov was ordered again to so called Old-Finland in early 1790 as the highest commanding officer. His task was to build a new fortification belt to Russo Swedish borderland to secure St.Petersburg against possible Swedish attack. Under his command served Colonel Fabian Steinheil and Dutch born Engineer Captain Jan Peter van Suchtelen. In his command were 40.000 soldiers who built to Lake Saimaa four war canals Kutvele, Kukonharju, Telataipale and Käyhkää. The Russians built up also "Saimaa Fleet" (Saijmaiskij Flota). In addition Suvorov built a new chain of field garrisons named Kyminlinna, Ruotsinsalmi, Järvitaipale, Utti, Liikkala and Taavetti which formed the outer defence garrison chain. Also old Viipuri (Viborg) and Käkisalmi (Kexholm) fortresses were strenghtened. Most of his time Suvorov lived in Hamina (Fredrikshamn) in the house of a doctor´s widow Mrs Griin. He was then a bitter old man who wrote letters to his daughter but not to his son. He was not in any connection with his former wife Varvara Ivanovna Prozorovskaja. Evenings Suvorov spent with Mrs Griin talking of his Finnish roots and his career as an officer in Russian Army. Sometimes he started drink and that lasted for couple of weeks. A habit which followed him all his life. He seemed to be loneless poor old man. Lucky for Suvarov he was ordered on the last days of December 1792 back to St.Petersburg to take the Command of Crimean Army. One Finnish officer Yrjö (Georg) Maunu (Magnus) von Sprengtporen, so called Anjala League man met Suvorov in Prag in 1799. His classic comment was: "Ukko on sotilaallinen nero, omituisesti käyttäytyväksi hulluksi joka noituu kuin lappalainen." (Old man is military genius,for strange behaiving grazy, who witches like Lapp.) When crossing the Alps Suvorov was drunken and he song old Finnish folklores for his soldiers. He was honoured to Count Ryminski after Roma. His last wish was that only a small brass plate where should be written in Finnish: "Tässä lepää Suvorov." Brass plate it was, as he had wished, but his words were written in Russian. Thus, who this man with thousand faces really was?


Aleksanteri Vasilinpoika Suvenvaara[edit]

This is the answer to a question I asked before. There is a good Finnish book written by Kauko Rekola "Suvorov - Generalissimus - Genious" which is based to documents and other interesting old written material without any attempts to exaggerate Suvorov´s military participation to the battles (just as his role in Russo - Swedish war in 1741-1743 at the age of 12 to 14 year half grown youngster). His task seems to have been interprayer because he spoke Finnish. Finland´s leading newspaper published on July 28, 2004 a large article of Suvorov, where his roots were described and his career in Russian army. This article resulted one letter to editorial staff also published in the newspaper and which I think should also been published here to make things clear and stop any speculation.

"Thanks of Aleksanteri Suvorov article published on 28.07.2004, which - at last - makes to large public clear, that the genious war chief was clearly of Finnish origin. Man talked whole his life poor Russian, and when learned it well he pointed his Finnish backround by talking Russian unproperly.

Suvorov was not Ingermanlander (by born), but from Borovitsi (Porovitsa = Reinder twing) district born in village of Kamenka (Kivelä). In now a days maps about 150 km east from Novgorod you find names Bol.Kamennik, (Malaja Kamennik) and Kontshansko - Suvorovskoje. (Presumably the last mentioned by its current name is old village of Kamenka / Kivelä.)

The area is so called Novgorod Karelia, which is generally identifyd to Tver (Tihveri) Karelia. For this historical Finnish inhabited area, today is recommended to use name Tytär - Karjala (Daughter - Karelia).

Suvorov himself told of his ancestors who escaped from Finland (they were of Orthodoks fate) in 1622 named Naum and Suvor. In 1791 a Swedish diplomat Jennings, when visiting Suvorov in Hamina (Fredrikshamn) on his way to St.Petersburg, wrote down the enigmatic explanation Suwara and Sywe wara (which have been explaned to mentioned Karelian name).

Vaara (high hill) is rarely deep (syvä), but in Karelia are many Suvi-, Suur-, and Suenvaaras. (Suenvaara / Suvenvaara = Wolf´s vaara.)

Signed Lauri Heikkilä.

Those marked in brankets are my additions from other Finnish sources.


the Praga 'massacre' - who cares?[edit]

too much attention to 'massacre'. Beter hold it in Battle of Praga articles. During wars of Suvorov, too many people died, and those few thousands of poles are not significant. —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 00:30, 22 February 2008 (UTC)


Copied from Template talk:Infobox military person
Hello everyone,

On the Suvorov talk page there's been a message under the Wikiproject Biography template stating that "an appropriate infobox may need to be added to this article." This message has been there since at least September 2006 and since then apperantly no one has bothered to add an infobox to the article or remove the message. I decided to add one with this edit. I'm not sure whether I overdid it with information or what, but the infobox was removed a few days later by Ghirlandajo (talk · contribs).

Now, mind you, I really hate to see the work thrown in the trash without any apperant reason stated in the edit summary. However, as the aforementioned gentleman appears to be an admin, my only conclusion is that he knows what he's doing and an infobox does not belong in that article...for whatever reason that is. If that is the case, the message asking for one needs to be removed from the talk page so that others won't make the same mistake. My other conclusion is that the users who dominate that article just don't like infoboxes. In any case, I haven't reverted the edits but instead have come here wondering what you all think on the matter.

Regards, (talk) 09:37, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

Count of Holy Roman Empire?[edit]

How did Russian nobility gain Imperial German titles? -- Petri Krohn (talk) 09:56, 31 March 2009 (UTC)

Theres a few Brits and Frenchmen too with such a privilege as I recall. The Shirleys as I recall, and the Thompson could (the first American counts). Can't remember but I'm sure theres a Scot too. Gave those things away like candy. Reminds me of handing out stock in a bankrupt company, za derzhavoo obidno. (talk) 09:20, 26 September 2010 (UTC)

It is all actually VERY WELL documented story. Austrian Emperor gave Suvorov this title for a simple reason that he was about to make the latter the Supreme Commander over significant part of Austrian Army, which under the Austrian Law was the privilege enjoyed only by Highest Nobility of the Austrian Empire. Hence the title. (talk) 12:28, 20 June 2017 (UTC)

Suvorov was probably Swedish (in the style)[edit]

Anyone with good historical knowledge will se that Suvorovs tactics was how the Swedes reasoned. Concerning his Ethnicity, i dont know who he was for certain, but his whole battletactics-style is swedish, to the one who know about those things there is an abundance of material to prove that rather the Swedes where the first to specialize on bayonet-attacks etc. And also if you look at pictures of him there is always something suggesting that he had a Swedish connection, his weaponshield for example, and also the colours he is surrounded by many times. As i said, the ethnicity i dont know about, but the whole approach is something that is obvious to someone with good knowledge. And in his day Finland was still a part of Sweden so it could be the same connection, in a way. It seems to be a fact that his forefathers came from Sweden but i still maintain that his whole legacy is supposed to be built on that fact. I hope i have brought something to this ethnicity and tactics debate. But to be really honest i almost think that much about him is completely made up, or at least exaggerated. First of all: There is almost nothing he seem to have written himself that would give a good picture about him, mostly what others have written about him. What i would want is a thorough investigation and discussion involving completely objective scholars, then this could probably be sorted out. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 17:37, 6 November 2011 (UTC)

Name and title[edit]

Is that entire paragraph, including "six-times" wounded, part of his actual Russian name and title? Or does it end with the various ranks and degrees of nobility, with the rest of the paragraph being broken out as a separate sentence giving the very brief overview of his career? (talk) 16:28, 17 November 2012 (UTC)

Origins and ethnicity[edit]

Suvorov was Russian, it's sure. But how his ancestors, this link in Finnish: says that Suvorov wrote in 1791 to Jennings that his lastname Suvorov comes from old Finnish words "Sywe" (Deep) and "wara" (hill). So it was believed to be first Syvävaara, then later Sywewara, later Suwara and finally Suvor(ov). Who knows? But this same source says second possibility, Suvorov might be mentioned in Бархатная книга..! — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 19:02, 19 November 2013 (UTC)

Why is the Armenian ancestry theme is so popular despite the absence of any historical evidence? All 'proof-links' lead to armenian nationalist sites which makes this story look so far fetched and hard to believe. Masusimaru (talk) 04:01, 17 June 2014 (UTC)

His maternal family has an Armenian name, he founded an Armenian town, his mother was buried in an Armenian graveyard, an Armenian military school is named after him, etc.. these are backed up by sources, unlike your edits. Stop vandalizing. --Steverci (talk) 15:43, 19 June 2014 (UTC)
That's what I am begging for: reliable sources. Not speculations. Andrei Platonov was buried at the same cemetery and this does not make him Armenian. Masusimaru (talk) 11:36, 25 June 2014 (UTC)

Steverci, please stop doing what you are doing. Wikipedia articles should be based on reliable, published sources WP:SPS WP:RS/AC. You are not adding any new sources regarding Armenian ancestry, but still keep restoring your old edits that are not backed by such sources. This is the last time I am undoing these changes without escalation. Masusimaru (talk) 13:59, 5 November 2014 (UTC)

Looking quickly at the sources removed here. Is ref name=Авдотья really a reliable source? This daily informative magazine "" to quote Google Translate's rendition of the bottom of the page looks like a Readers' Digest type of magazine: nice for reading, but not a scholarly reliable source for a historical article. It definitely looks like the Armenian Weekly is a reliable source, but ref name=Remembering is not: it's an opinion page, an editorial, and editorials are only reliable for "the editor thinks X". And the one removed here — the Foreign Languages Publishing House was the USSR's state publishing house for non-Russian materials, and we generally trust government publications. I see no reason to doubt it. Nyttend (talk) 12:36, 13 December 2014 (UTC)
User:Nyttend Also note the military school named after Alexander Suvorov and Valerian Madatov sourced in the Legacy section. This confirms that the Armenian government recognizes Suvorov's Artsakh Armenian princely ancestry to be true. --Steverci (talk) 20:54, 13 December 2014 (UTC)
User:Steverci Nyttend is right, your sources are not acceptable for a serious project like Wikipedia. Military schools all over the world are named after Suvorov, there's one in Minsk, Belarus. Does it make Suvorov Belarusian? No. You keep restoring your speculations on the Armenian word 'Manuk'. This is clearly an inline original research. Please remove it. You keep insisting that Suvorov's mother is buried in Moscow in the Armenian Vagankovo Cemetery - where's the proof? Where's the grave photo? Anything? And even if it is true (which is apparently not), russian writer Andrei Platonov is burried in the same place - you want to make him Armenian too? Your repeated references of "" are irrelevant, as well as of a book 'Prominent Armenians' which has no ISBN and is not accessible in libraries (I've checked). Do you have one? Apparently no, nobody does. This book does not exist. As for this source - can you explain, what is it? Why did you choose this fiction-oriented magazine of Soviet Union of Writers, which does not cite its historical sources, as academical proof of your point? Google led you there? That's totally unacceptable. In addition you are now trying to ban me from editing this page via Administrators lever of influence. I ask you to please revert ALL your biased statements and fakery links and stop restoring them.Masusimaru (talk) 15:08, 15 December 2014 (UTC)
Nyttend is agreeing with me.. The Suvorov Military College is a chain created in Russia. Also see Pan-Slavism; Belarus is the most pro-Russia country in the world and the last bastion of Stalinism. It's not out of place to see a legendary Russian figure among Eastern Slavs. Armenians have no Slavic nationality and have removed any tribute to the likes of Catherine the Great or Lenin or other famous Russians after becoming independent. The fact Suvorov shares the school name with an Artsakhi prince just makes it too obvious. I'll admit when I first listed Suvorov's Armenian ancestry I lacked an undisputable source, but I have since found that in the Soviet Encyclopedia and Grigory Potemkin's own words, so you might as well give up already. I am not claiming that everyone buried there is an Armenian, just that it's an Armenian cemetary, which it is. And you should speak for yourself, not of your sources have ISBN, nor do many others. Infact, google translate is not a source for anything. It's also interesting you use a Belarus website as source, yet call my sources unacceptable when I cited the Nakhichevan-on-Don website, which is an Armenian city founded by Suvorov himself. --Steverci (talk) 02:48, 19 December 2014 (UTC)

I just gave you an example of how ANY statement can be 'proved' using multiple non-academic sources. If you would like to remove my proofs, please remove yours as well. You should be careful not to theoretize in a Wiki article, however I understand who I am talking to, and the reason are you so biased in this question. So I'd rather not continue pointing out obvious things. You are not careful about your own sources, this one does not list Avdotia Manukova in its 'prominent people' section. I can read Russian, this will not trick me. Russian pages seem to be moderated more thoroughly, that's why this kind of speculations, rumors and sources trickery are wiped out from Suvorov page in Russian wiki.Masusimaru (talk) 09:03, 22 December 2014 (UTC)

Suvorovs Armenian ancestry?[edit]

Frankly, I have never ever heard of this and the source seems totally unreliable to me. The discussion above didn't seem to have made any substantial improvement regarding this issue, so I'm digging this up again

- LouisAragon (talk) 15:52, 29 April 2015 (UTC)

I have since come across even more sources confirming his Armenian ancestry:

There is more than sufficient evidence to state Suvorov was at least half Armenian. His mother had a very Armenian family name, he was involved in many related affairs such as founding Nakhichevan-on-Don, building an Armenian language school, and even spoke the language himself. Grigory Potemkin is also quoted saying he has Caucasus origin. --Steverci (talk) 16:49, 29 April 2015 (UTC)
This is WP:UNDUE at best.
1) Арсений Замостьянов (Arseniy Zamostianov) is a blogger at best, and the blog piece you've referenced has no citations for Suvorov's mother being of a Russified Armenian family.
2) Noev Kovcheg carries a disclaimer as to the self-published content of the site not reflecting the opinions of the editors (of the blog/opinion pieces published), and Эмануил Долбакян (Emanuel Dolbakyan) doesn't have any credentials outside of being a Neurophysiologist(!?) and self-appointed spokesperson for the Armenian diaspora in the form of the Ararat Association Chairman (whoever they are, and whatever weight that position actually carries). How that makes him anything beyond an autodidact eludes me.
3) The final piece you are referencing at Shkola Zhizni (School of Life: yet another of the thousands of blogosphere sites for amateur hobbyists) was written by a certain Хайаса Арарат (Khaiasa Ararat... er, nom de plume anyone?) is also based on speculation.
Ultimately, whether Suvorov had Armenian ancestry is WP:FRINGE. Even if it were demonstrably true using WP:RS rather than WP:POV-pushing, the relevance is so peripheral and negligible for his biography that I would certainly understand it to be UNDUE.
Nevertheless, I'll ping a few regular editors and admins who are likely to have a reasonable knowledge of this era for their opinions on the matter: Ymblanter, My very best wishes, Ezhiki, Aleksandr Grigoryev, Altenmann, Laszlo Panaflex, Alex Bakharev, Любослов Езыкин, and Illythr. My apologies for disturbing anyone, but I just wanted to get a bit of a cross-section in order to get NPOV input. --Iryna Harpy (talk) 04:39, 1 May 2015 (UTC)
This is indeed a well-known hoax.--Ymblanter (talk) 06:17, 1 May 2015 (UTC)
I suggest you to check the Russian version of the article. It is very well written about that fact. Apparently, the Russian writer and historian Nina Moleva (ru:Молева, Нина Михайловна) acknowledges existing of such a fact, but officially it is rather a legend as on the mother's side (Manukov family), the family descended from the Russian servicemen from Moscow (implying that Alexander is a real Muscovite). On the father's side, Suvorov traces its roots to the old Swedish noble family. Aleksandr Grigoryev (talk) 09:39, 1 May 2015 (UTC)

One thing that is certain is that at the very least it needs to be mentioned that Suvorov has possible Armenian ancestry. Aleksandr I have been looking at other language wikis, and both the featured Bulgarian and Greek articles both note his Armenian background (and so do many more). Another source not mentioned here is that his Armenian ancestry is acknowledged by the government of Armenia. I would not say UNDUE applies here because there is certainly a lot of weight for it. Combined with the Armenian government, a Russian government news source reported it and the Potemkin quote as well, and then there is the credible secondary source historian Moleva. Obviously this is more than a hoax. Iryna suggests this to be too minor to mention even if it were true, and that is wrong. His Swedish/Finnish distant background is already mentioned, plus Suvorov had organized creating an Armenian city, built an Armenian language school, petitioned to annex Armenia into Russia, etc.. It's more than worth noting in his background. --Steverci (talk) 02:50, 2 May 2015 (UTC)

Any further developments on the credibility? At this point, taking WP:WINARS on board, I'm not in the least compelled to consider what other language Wikipedias say on the matter. It's a matter of WP:RS, and not basing such mentions of his activities, hence deductions that, because he was considered to be a little bit weird, his actions were motivated by alleged ancestral allegiances. Incidentally, if petitioning for annexation of Armenia to Russia was involved, I'd venture an educated guess that he'd hardly be considered an Armenian hero. Might-have been really doesn't cut it for DUE regarding an encyclopaedic article as it's a WP:TROJAN in terms of how Suvorov is understood as an historical figure, swaying the emphasis away from his notability. You may perceive this as WP:ITSIMPORTANT or WP:ITSINTERESTING... but is it really? --Iryna Harpy (talk) 01:55, 4 May 2015 (UTC)
It is rather obvious that there will be no improvements on credibility ever. The Armenian ancestry is an exotic theory and is not supported by any academic sources. By the way, are Steverci's edits on 29 April 2015‎ even legal? I think this user must be banned from wiki for removing warnings and information without attempting to discuss. (talk) 10:38, 12 May 2015 (UTC)

No proof about the Swedish or Finish origin of the name of Suvorov .[edit]

Sovorov name could be Swedish, Finish , Lapon or maybe Armenian or even Korean origin. There is no any proof of Finish or Swedish origin of the name, even if the legend says that "we came from Sweden" and what? British legend says "Brits came from Armenia" Does it mean what all Britons are Armenians? Maybe Bavarian people are also Armenians ? Legend says! How many Korelian or Finish or Swedish origin people that time spoke fluent Armenian ? Suvorov's father did speak fluent Armenian but no evidence about his fluent Finish. BTW The first Armenians in Sweden that times were acting like interpreters for Swedish court and translated from Swedish to Turkish, Persian or other oriental languages . The name Svryants is common surname in Sunik and Artzakh regions of Armenia. Please change the article and keep neutrality. Suvorov's parents origin is unknown no proofs that they are Russian, Armenian or Swedish. If you do not have enough proofs to say that Suvorov had Armenian origin you do not have also enough proofs to say about Finish or Swedish origin too. -- (talk) 10:58, 5 July 2015 (UTC)Svryantz-- (talk) 11:02, 5 July 2015 (UTC)Svryantz

You may want to read WP:OR and WP:RS before you continue further soapboxing. Thank you.--Ymblanter (talk) 11:07, 5 July 2015 (UTC)

Please do not go to personal offences. If you call this soapboxing, your arguments are just from shoesboxing you even can not step on this .Where are RS about Suvorovs Swedish orgin or Finish one ? Only Legends? Family legends ? Thanks in advance -- (talk) 12:01, 5 July 2015 (UTC)Svryants

There are some academically recognized sources in support of Swedish roots of his family (like this one but of course there's no 100% proof of that. But at least this theory worth mentioning in the article, unlike Armenian or Korean theories, which have no proofs at all. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Masusimaru (talkcontribs) 19:54, 5 July 2015 (UTC)

The Academical source? Do you think edited version (mentioned in web online) of Bantysh-Kamensky written biography of Suvorov is academical source? Ok!

As I know the academical source is the fundamental historical research of origin of the family coming up an down to persons who? when? and how founded the family of Suvorov in this case. With clear presented objective evidences coming from church vestry books and the lists of baptized people for certain church ,aristocratic or nobility estates books and lists, town hall population registers etc. In case of many less important personalities in Russia this is researched and presented with all kind of objective evidences. Why you do not have such kind of real academical source and research in Russia for A.V Suvorov and his origin? Where is the grave of Suvorovs Mother now Mrs. Manukova/Manukyan? Is the grave of the A.V Suvorov in original place now (now he is in Alexander Nevsky Lavra) or He was reburied ? If he was re buried were is the original place of his entombment ? Those are "academical"questions for identifying of Swedish origin or denouncing of Armenian origin one of the greatest Warriors of Mother Russia? At least that should be done as Tribute of Respect. Let's look to your link and This is coming from your so called "academical"source. Князь Александръ Васильевичь Италійскій, Графъ Суворовъ-Рымникскій

Князь Александръ Васильевичь Италійскій, Графъ Суворовъ-Рымникскій, сынъ Генералъ-Аншефа, Сенатора и кавалера ордена Св. Александра Невскаго, Василія Ивановича Суворова{336}, родился въ Москвѣ 13 Ноября 1729 года. Отецъ его, человѣкъ просвѣщенный и зажиточный, приготовлялъ сына къ гражданской службѣ; но Суворовъ, съ самыхъ юныхъ лѣтъ, оказывалъ предпочтеніе военной: обучался съ успѣхомъ Отечественному языку, Французскому, Нѣмецкому, Италіянскому, Исторіи и Философіи, и съ жадностію читалъ Корнелія Непота, Плутарха, описаніе походовъ Тюреня и Монтекукули; говорилъ съ восхищеніемъ о Кесарѣ и Карлѣ XII, заставилъ отца своего перемѣнить намѣреніе. Онъ былъ записанъ лейбъ-гвардіи въ Семеновскій полкъ солдатомъ (1742 г.)., продолжая учиться въ Сухопутномъ Кадетскомъ Корпусѣ. Между тѣмъ попечительный родитель преподавалъ ему самъ инженерную науку; каждый день читалъ съ нимъ Вобана, котораго Василій Ивановичь перевелъ въ 1724 году съ Французскаго на Россійскій языкъ по приказанію своего крестнаго отца, Петра Великаго; заставлялъ сравнивать переводъ съ подлинникомъ. Одаренный отъ природы необыкновенною памятью , молодой Суворовъ зналъ Вобана почти наизусть{337}.

Where in the text is his Swedish origin proclaimed? Again nowadays we have great example of Russian Singer Phillip Kirkorov Who proclaimed himself like Bulgarian, when His Father Bedros Kirkorov (alive now) is Armenian and his Mother Victoria was Jew. And everybody in Russia "academically" insisting on his Bulgarian origin.( Because his father came from Bulgaria). I think Russia and Russians should be more honest about A.V. Suvorov and less arrogant in case of his real origin identification. Do you think Russian "biographers" in XVIII-XIX century were less chauvinist or nationalist than many people now ? BTW It was times when they truly believed what 'Varjags' were Slavic ( maybe this is the reason of Great Warrior's Swedish origin preference in nowadays Russia). Just think how academical is this ?--Svryantz (talk) 11:02, 6 July 2015 (UTC) Svryantz

I (again) agree that none of the theories of Suvorov' ethnicity are 100% verifiable. So go ahead and make appropriate corrections to the article accordingly, in its current state it is far from being ideal (I mean references to some obscure finnish website as a source). We only know for sure that he perceived himself as Russian. But (again) if by Suvorov's own words his family might be from Sweden - why not mention it in the article? (not as a fact, but as a plausible version) Masusimaru (talk) 11:18, 6 July 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for the answer. I tried to do it but WP did not save my corrections . The statement of Swedish ambassador ( I did not see the source readable ) is not reliable just because there were discussion on the diplomatic soil. Why not? It worthy to be mentioned but with clear definition of thecontext. The article seems not locked yet but it does not accept my savings--Svryantz (talk) 11:37, 6 July 2015 (UTC)Svryantz--Svryantz (talk) 11:44, 6 July 2015 (UTC)Svryantz

Pls stop inserting original research about his Armenian origin. It was rejected multiple times at this talk page.--Ymblanter (talk) 15:18, 6 July 2015 (UTC)

Please stop chauvinistic approach to the article. There is no original research source about his Swedish origin only statement with no evidences and you are not protesting against this. You were not protesting also against is Finish origin with obscure RS presented before. why? The name Manukov is the most probable russificate version of the name Manukian - Armenian name. What is wrong here ? Do you have proofs what this is russified version of the Swedish or any Finish names ? Do you have ancestries' tree of Mrs. Avdotya Manukova? If yes where is the grave of Avdotya Manukova ? or grave of Fedosey Manukov ( Armenian version Tadeos Manukov/Manukyan) . Do not try to put this into linguistic discussions soil to avoid any Research or Investigation .Who are Manukovs ? Where are they coming from ? Where is the crypt of the family ( used to have nobel families in Russia that time). For now just look to List of Armenian names and think why you are not accepting this probable version . Just try to be honest. Good luck! --Svryantz (talk) 16:45, 6 July 2015 (UTC)Svryantz

Look, I advised you to read Wikipedia policies, and you have taken it as a personal offence. Now, if you do not want to be blocked, you will have to do it. This is for you: WP:OR. I do not particularly care about Swedish origin, the difference is that the Swedish version had one slightly reliable source, and the Armenian one has exactly zero reliable sources. Moreover, there are reliable sources which show it is a hoax.Please stop inserting a hoax into the article, this is a blockable offence. Thank you for understanding.--Ymblanter (talk) 16:57, 6 July 2015 (UTC)

Look the list of Armenian names is also "slightly"reliable source. Again My original propose was to skip any reference to origin of the family of Suvorovs (BTW I did the same in Russian version). If you need some additional "slight"or even s direct solid references you can look to Armenian version of the same article and start to argue there. If you had showed me objective approach and deleted all not solid RS statements in this article I would not see this like tendencial or chauvinistic approach to delete probable version . My questions are still remained open. If you say that orange is not yellow you have to explain Why? My slight reliable source is the reference to List of Armenian names BTW also common in Russia names of nowadays rusified Manukovs that had been originally Manukyans or Manukians . Do you want to present the List of other Manukovs- proved Armenians who are living nowadays in Russia? For probable version This could be enough for you like slight RS ? Do you have also doubts that for example Smith is English origin name ? and many Smiths are living in America,Australia, Europe and India. BTW in Russian version you write the same name like "Смит" with no H at the end ? So now we have to proof that Smith in Russia is also Smith with no H ? Maybe we have white, black or asian Smiths, but this is still English surname. About offences . You started with naming me or my view "soapboxing" not me but you and this very impolite. So in context of projection of many nationalistic or chauvinistic opinions into supposed to be neutral articles in WP any kind of "innocent" actions of asking proofs for "Смит" with no H looks very suspicions. Смит is Smith Mankuv is most probable Manukyan. What is wrong here? Good Luck! --Svryantz (talk) 17:31, 6 July 2015 (UTC)Svryantz--Svryantz (talk) 17:36, 6 July 2015 (UTC)Svryantz--Svryantz (talk) 17:39, 6 July 2015 (UTC)Svryantz

I am sorry that you still have no understanding of Wikipedia policies. In Russian Wikipedia, all edits introducing a hoax about Armenian origin were immediately reverted, at least this year. I will be waiting for a 3RRN admin, may be they will have better luck explaining you the policies.--Ymblanter (talk) 17:38, 6 July 2015 (UTC)

Why you do not try to do the same in Armenian version of this article ? You can try to proof there that Manukov is not probable rusified Manukyan. Thank you!--Svryantz (talk) 17:44, 6 July 2015 (UTC) Svryantz

I do not speak Armenian and have zero interest in developing the Armenian Wikipedia.--Ymblanter (talk) 17:53, 6 July 2015 (UTC)
Svryantz, read WP:BURDEN. Wikipedia is not personal speculation. I could argue that Suvorov is the Russified version of Suvorenko: it's a non-argument. Enough treating this talk page as a soapbox or forum. --Iryna Harpy (talk) 01:05, 7 July 2015 (UTC)

And you have the list of Suvorovs with (derivative from ) original name Suvorenko (proved Ukrainian name if I understand you right?) Why not go ahead ! . Please Do not use fancy words and turn this discussion to "Soapboxing" like you said, or provoke to turn it to "forum" argues . Pls. do not abuse the rules of WP to cover any nationalistic or chauvinistic intention or behavior. I do not see anything violating WP rules in my opinion. If you have arguments/lists that Suvorovs are former Suvorenko pls. go ahead . If he can be Swedish origin ( no solid RS) with Russian name Suvorov why he can not be the same with original name Suvorenko or even Svryantz. What is wrong in mentioning, what Manukov is still common name in Russia and this was derivative /rusified version of Armenian name of Manukian? Are you sensitive to word Armenian ? If yes Why you were OK with the words Swedish or Finish or Russian till now? Try to be honest please . Thank you --Svryantz (talk) 01:57, 7 July 2015 (UTC)Svryantz --Svryantz (talk) 02:08, 7 July 2015 (UTC) Svryantz

Well, if there are either reliable or notable sources of Armenian heritage of Suvorov (being them in English, Russian, Armenian or Swedish) lets bring it here. Reliable sources can be reported as facts, notable as notable opinions. No amount of talk page discussions can substitute sources. IMHO the available data are reported correctly. Supposedly Armenian heritage of Suvorov is based on hypothesis that the last name of Manukov is russified Manukyan. The supposed Swedish heritage on some phrases that Suvorov told on some occasions. Both versions are hardly supported by extensive genealogical data Alex Bakharev (talk) 02:49, 7 July 2015 (UTC)

That was exactly the point I was trying to make about Suvorenko ("Суворенко"), and was actually being flippant about it. The fact that the surname exists is irrelevant. I could speculate until the cows come home, but there is absolutely nothing in the way of sources that would begin to suggest that he had any form of Ukrainian background... ergo it's a non-starter, and I've never encountered any such claims. Surnames could potentially emanate from anywhere and be Russified, Anglicized, etc. My godfather, for example, Anglicized his surname from Demianiuk (no, not that one) to Damien. It sounds like a surname straight out of the UK. Given a couple of generations, his great-grandchildren won't have any idea of where the surname originated from (unless they consult the Australian deeds poll and it is still in existence). Just because a name resembles that of another ethnic group, it doesn't mean anything unless there is reliably sourced material to substantiate the hypothetical.
Furthermore, Ukrainian Wikipedia (like Russian Wikipedia) has removed all references to the Swedish and Armenian 'ethnic' background as it is not reliably sourced, full stop.
At best, elaborations on the ethnic background speculating on the ancestry of his mother, and even the purported Swedish claim by Suvorov himself, which is anecdotal, is WP:UNDUE. --Iryna Harpy (talk) 03:47, 7 July 2015 (UTC)

Yes! this is one of the hypothesis that last name Manukov is probable rusified name of Manukian. I believe this hypothesis worth to be mentioned as well based on the list of Armenian names. But this hypothesis or mentioning this is not " Armenian Heritage" - Just probable origin of the name. Like Mr. Smith could be African heritage but surname has probable English origin . It does not mean that the person is Englishman.

Based on written biography by A. Petrushevsky . The one of the founder of Suvorov's family had name Juda Suvor the founder of Suvorov's family who came from Sweden

При московском великом князе Семене Ивановиче Гордом, выехали из Швеции в Московскую землю «мужи честны» Павлин с сыном Андреем и тут поселились. Потомство их росло, множилось и расселялось; один из этих потомков назывался Юда Сувор; от него пошел род Суворовых 1. Прадед генералиссимуса назывался Григорием Ивановичем (сын Ивана Парфентьевича), а дед Иваном Григорьевичем. Иван Григорьевич Суворов служил при Петре Великом в Преображенском полку генеральным писарем, был дважды женат и умер в 1715 году; от первой жены он имел сына Ивана, от второй (Марфы Ивановны) Василия и Александра. Все три сына Ивана Григорьевича были женаты и оставили по себе потомство; Василий Иванович имел сына Александра и дочерей Анну и Марию 2.

I think we have to mention about this as well maybe with definition of probable origin of the name. We have to understand the clear deference in What does it mean "came from", "origin or Heritage " or probable "origin of the name". Thank you --Svryantz (talk) 04:12, 7 July 2015 (UTC) Svryantz

Iryna Harpy|Iryna Harpy, Please do not present Ukrainian or Russian Wikiarticle like a standard for the English version . In this case I would refer you to read Armenian version ( Google translator will help you) About your GodFather . I believe If he were such a Great personality like A.V Suvorov many people will research and investigate the origin of his name as well . Sorry but this kind of arguments look like pathetic . Thank you!--Svryantz (talk) 04:17, 7 July 2015 (UTC)Svryantz--Svryantz (talk) 04:23, 7 July 2015 (UTC)Svryantz

Sigh. Again, you've missed the point: if someone chose to research my Godfather, there would be surviving official records lodged with the relevant Australian records offices. Where do you propose that such 'official' records would exist in the Russian Empire attesting to his mother's purported Armenian ancestry during the era under discussion? --Iryna Harpy (talk) 04:37, 7 July 2015 (UTC)

It looks you did not read discussion above. Armenian community in Russia that time before and after was very well organized and integrated. All kind of information or records had been definitely archived in Russian state's archives . Just from discussion above FYI: "As I know the academical source is the fundamental historical research of origin of the family coming up an down to persons who? when? and how founded the family of Suvorov in this case. With clear presented objective evidences coming from church vestry books and the lists of baptized people for certain church ,aristocratic or nobility estates books and lists, town hall population registers etc. In case of many less important personalities in Russia this is researched and presented with all kind of objective evidences" --Svryantz (talk) 04:46, 7 July 2015 (UTC)Svryantz


>> Suvorov was married to Varvara Ivanovna Prozorovskaya of the Golitsyn family

Prozorovskys are Rurikids. Golitsyns are Gediminids. These are two different families not the branch one of another. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 23:29, 23 September 2016 (UTC)

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Alexander Suvorov. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

☒N An editor has determined that the edit contains an error somewhere. Please follow the instructions below and mark the |checked= to true

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 16:07, 8 October 2016 (UTC)

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Alexander Suvorov. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

☑Y An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 02:35, 1 July 2017 (UTC)

Checked but never defeated[edit]

One section on the Russian retreat through the alps reads: "When Suvorov battled his way through the snow-capped Alps his army was checked but never defeated."

What does this mean exactly? It sounds a lot more like propaganda than a clear explanation of events. By checked was he forced to retreat in another direction due to military action--is that a defeat? Or was it due to weather, and therefore not a defeat? I just think this line could be improved. (talk) 23:16, 5 June 2018 (UTC)

I don't find any "propaganda" here whatsoever. He skillfully avoided being surrounded and defeated by a numerically superior force and successfully retreated through the Alps, fighting off the French and saving his army. And that's exactly what the passage says. (talk) 10:15, 6 June 2018 (UTC)
Checking to me, implies that an attempt was made to go forward, which was unsuccessful, and thus required an attempt in another direction. Being checked means your attempt to maneuver was defeated. Sounds a lot like propaganda to me. (talk) 03:41, 9 June 2018 (UTC)

The move through the alps was a retreat, he was checked. That doesn’t say he was defeated in battle. He was not defeated during the march which it refers to, nor in any other significant engagement, but by the nature of his march through the alps being a retreat he was checked, the manoeuvre he tried was going on the offensive in Italy and Switzerland which failed, so at the campaign level it is probably considered a defeat by some/many but it seems to be referring to engagements, defeats by the enemy outmanoeuvring or actually fighting him. A retreat to his army to safety from a bad situation could also be counted as a defeat but I don’t think there are all that many people that do this in relation to this particular one. So it is a rather vague statement but not incorrect as far as I’m aware. It would probably be good to replace it with a clearer statement. Dorromikhal (talk) 07:52, 3 September 2019 (UTC)

The move through the alps was a retreat, he was checked. That doesn’t say he was defeated in battle. He was not defeated during the march which it refers to, nor in any other significant engagement, but by the nature of his march through the alps being a retreat he was checked, the manoeuvre he tried was going on the offensive in Italy and Switzerland which failed, so at the campaign level it is probably considered a defeat by some/many but it seems to be referring to engagements, defeats by the enemy outmanoeuvring or actually fighting him. A retreat to his army to safety from a bad situation could also be counted as a defeat but I don’t think there are all that many people that do this in relation to this particular one. So it is a rather vague statement but not incorrect as far as I’m aware. It would probably be good to replace it with a clearer statement. Dorromikhal (talk) 07:52, 3 September 2019 (UTC)

For some reason it placed my reply twice, don’t know why. Dorromikhal (talk) 07:53, 3 September 2019 (UTC)