"Russian Land." Slavs, Varangians, Normans, and Rus'

7 682 80
"Russian Land." Slavs, Varangians, Normans, and Rus'
Vasnetsov A. M. Ancient Veliky Novgorod


In previous articles, we noted that a number of medieval authors clearly distinguished the contemporary Rus' (Russes) from the Slavs. Typically, the Rus' are portrayed as people similar to the Scandinavians, and are sometimes even directly identified with the Normans. Their place of residence is identified as the banks of the Dnieper River and the northern Black Sea region, where they appeared long before Rurik's "calling." The famous Icelander Snorri Sturluson was also convinced of this, writing in one of the "royal sagas" of the collection "The Circle of the Earth":



North of the Black Sea lies Great, or Cold, Sweden... (On many Scandinavian maps of the time, the south-north direction does not coincide with the modern one, but is rotated 45 degrees and points northeast). From the north, from the mountains beyond the inhabited areas, a river flows through Sweden, the correct name of which is Tanais (Don)... It flows into the Black Sea. The area at its mouth was then called the land of the Vanir. This river divides thirds of the world. The one to the east is called Asia... The country in Asia east of Tanais is called the Land of the Aesir or the home of the Aesir, and the capital of the country was called Asgard. The ruler there was one called Odin...

And this is an excerpt from the Younger Edda (a textbook of skaldic poetry) that he wrote:

Odin and his wife received a prophecy, revealing that his name would be exalted in the northern part of the world and revered above all kings. So he set out on a journey... Odin and his people were celebrated and considered gods...

According to Sturlson, after Odin's death, Njord of Noatun became the ruler of "Little Sweden" (i.e., the state on the territory of modern-day Sweden)—not an Aesir, but a hostage from the Vanir clan, whom many researchers tend to see as the familiar Wends. Note that the Scandinavians are completely at ease with the idea that the mythical ancestor of their Yngling kings was a Slav, and don't even think of harboring any complexes about it.

Njord's great-grandson, Sveigdir, vowed to find the old Odin's home, Asgard, and traveled to Greater Sweden, where he met many relatives. This journey, according to the Ynglinga Saga, lasted five years. It also states that Odin's great-grandson, Froddi, ruled the country later called Denmark, during the reign of Emperor Augustus. It states: "Then Christ was born."

Thus, Sturlson argues that, firstly, the ancestors of the Scandinavians lived in the Northern Black Sea region, and, secondly, that at the beginning of the new era, tribes related to the Scandinavians lived there.

It's worth noting that one of the oldest Scandinavian runic inscriptions known to science was discovered near Kovel (in modern-day Ukraine). It was inscribed on a spearhead and dates back to the 3rd–4th centuries AD.

A number of historians believe that the ethnonyms and names of the Rus' people indicate their Germanic origins. A striking example, they argue, is the names of the Dnieper rapids, which the Byzantine Emperor Constantine Porphyrogenitus, in his 10th-century work "On State Administration," cites both "in Russian" (Essup, Ulvoren, Gelandri, Eufar, Varouforos, Leanty, Struvun) and "in Slavic" (Ostrovuniprakh, Neyasit, Vulniprakh, Verutsi, Naprezi). In the 19th century, M.P. Pogodin called two of these rapids—Gelandri and Varouforos—"two pillars that will always support Normanism and withstand any axe." His opponent, N.A. Dobrolyubov, wrote about this in the ironic poem "Two Pillars":

Gelandri and Varuforos - these are my two pillars!
They put my theory on fate.
Thresholds this name so Leberg explained
From the Norman language, there is no way to argue.
Of course, the Greek author could have distorted them,
But he could, contrary to custom, write correctly.
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Gelandri and Varouforos are, so to speak, the bulls,
Oh koby you beat in vain fists.

Currently, it has been possible to translate the names of all the rapids into modern Russian, but to save time, I will provide the translations of the names of two rapids mentioned in Dobrolyubov's poem: Gelandri (giallandi) - "Noise of the Rapid"; Varuforos - baruforos ("Strong Wave") or varuforos ("High Cliff"). Another rapid, Eufor (eifors - "Eternally Furious," "Eternally Noisy"), is interesting because its name appears in a runic inscription on the Pilgard Stone (Gotland).

It's known that there were differences between the Rus' and the Slavs at the everyday level as well: the Rus' washed in a communal basin, shaved their heads, leaving a tuft of hair on the crown, lived in military settlements, and "fed" themselves off the spoils of war. The Slavs, on the other hand, washed under running water, cut their hair in a circle, and engaged in agriculture and livestock breeding. Incidentally, Olga's son, Prince Svyatoslav, according to Byzantine descriptions, was indeed a Rus': "he had a single tuft of hair on his head as a sign of his noble birth."


This is how Svyatoslav is depicted on a monument in the village of Kholki in the Belgorod region.

It should be noted that the Scandinavians themselves knew nothing of the "people of Rus": they called themselves Swedes, Danes, Normans, and referred to Kievan Rus' as "Gardariki" ("Country of Cities"). The Slavs also didn't call themselves Rus' at that time: Kyiv was inhabited by Poles, Smolensk, Polotsk, and Pskov by Krivichi, Novgorod by Slovenes, and so on. Only at the beginning of the 12th century does the author of the "Tale of Bygone Years" identify the Poles with the Rus': "Poles, who are called Rus'." We see that by that time the Rus' and the Kievan Slavs had already become thoroughly intermingled. But differences still remained, and the German chronicler Thietmar of Merseburg, drawing on accounts from Poles who visited Rus' in 1177, writes of Kyiv:

In the large city, which was the capital of this state, there were more than 400 churches, 8 market places and an extraordinary concentration of people, which, like the whole region, consisted of runaway slaves who had flocked here from everywhere, and very nimble Danes.

In this case, the Danes refer to all people who speak the "northern language"; in Western Europe, the words "Danes" and "Normans" were often used as synonyms.

The same can be said about Novgorod – the author of The Tale of Bygone Years directly states that its residents “became varnished” due to the appearance here of a large number of “overseas” settlers:

The Novgorodians are people from the Varangian clan, but before that they were Slavs.

That is, we can speak of close interaction between the Slavs and Scandinavians on the territory of the Russian principalities and active mutual influence.

Russian land


In the earliest sources of that time—both ancient Russian and foreign—we see how authors carefully distinguish between the Slavs, Rus', and Varangians, while chroniclers also identify individual Slavic tribes. For example, the entry for the year 944 reads:

Igor gathered together many warriors: Varangians, Rus, Polyans, and Slavs.

That is, the Varangians and the Rus turn out to be different people.

And from some chronicles, we learn with surprise that the borders of the "Russian land" initially do not coincide with the borders of the Old Russian state. One chronicle states that the Russian land is located on the route "from the Varangians to the Greeks," as well as "to the Bulgars and Khvalisy," and "along the Dvina to the Varangians." That is, exclusively along the most important waterways.


S. Ivanov. "Trading in the Land of the Eastern Slavs" – here we see the area along the route "to Khvalisy." On the left are an Arab and Khazar merchant, as well as merchants from Central Asia; on the right are a Slav, a Rus' man with "a single lock of hair on his head as a sign of his noble origin," and a representative of the Finno-Ugric tribes; in the center is a slave for sale.

The chronicles also report that to the north of the Russian land there is the “Varangian Sea” (Baltic), and to the south – the “Russian” (Black).

B. Rybakov offers the following version of the evolution of the concept of "Russian land": initially, it included Kyiv and Porosye, then Kyiv, Porosye, Chernigov, Pereyaslavl, the Seversk land, Kursk, possibly the eastern part of Volyn, and finally, all the East Slavic lands. But during the period of feudal fragmentation, separate lands emerged—Suzdal, Smolensk, Seversk, Novgorod, and so on. And the "Russian land" gradually became a territory inhabited by Orthodox Christians, who were contrasted with pagans, Catholics, and Muslims. And in a number of sources, expressions such as:

To defend one's fatherland and for the holy churches and for the orthodox Christian faith and for the entire Russian land.

Modern versions of the origin of the word "Rus"


Currently, there are two main theories about the origin of this word. According to the "northern" theory, it is of Finnish origin – from the word Ruotsi, which in turn is borrowed from Old Norse (rodsmen – "rower") and means "people (or warriors) in boats." In modern Finnish, Ruotsi is... Sweden (!). The Finns call Russia Venaja, and the Estonians call it Venemaa – clearly referring to the Slavic union of the Wends. The fact is that the Finns and Estonians' neighbors, the Novgorodians, unlike the Kyivans, traced their descent from the Western Slavs, the Wends, and not from the Eastern Slavs, the Antes. In Latvia, Russia is called Krievija, where we hear the name of the Krivichi tribe.

Proponents of this theory believe that in the East, the Scandinavians called themselves Rus' (rowers) because they couldn't use their traditional "long ships" and were forced to use so-called "odnoderevkas." Since they came from the Estonians and Finns, Novgorodians who first saw them might have asked their neighbors: "Who are these?" And they heard the very word Ruotsi, which was transformed into "Rus'." Thus, in the famous phrase from The Tale of Bygone Years, "the Varangian tribe Rus," the chronicler may have simply been explaining to his readers the Varangians' occupation. However, later readers decided that this was the name of a specific Varangian tribe.

In their work "The Normans in Rus' before Vladimir the Saint," B. Bogoyavlensky and K. Mitrofanov concluded that the "Rus" mentioned in the Tale of Bygone Years were people of Scandinavian origin who settled in the area of ​​today's Staraya Ladoga no later than the early 9th century. There, they founded the city of Aldeigaborg, which was later claimed as a vienna by Ingigerd, the Swedish wife of Yaroslav the Wise. They rested there and transferred from large seagoing vessels to small riverboats. Moreover, the main trade route was not the Dnieper, but the Volga: the Dnieper was primarily used not by merchants, but by warriors seeking to enter the service of the Kievan prince or even the emperor of Constantinople.


The latest archaeological research has shown that the Normans appeared not only on the shores of Lake Ladoga, but also on Lake Beloye and the Upper Volga approximately a hundred years earlier than the Slavs.

Many believe that in the quoted passage about Igor's warriors ("Igor, gathering many warriors. Varangians and Rus', and Polyans, and Slavs"), the chronicler refers to the inhabitants of Ladoga and the surrounding region as Rus', and to the members of organized Norman retinues, specially hired by the prince for the campaign against Constantinople, as Varangians. The Swedish historian A. Strinnholm wrote on this matter:

The name of the Varangians is most simply and naturally derived from the word vaeria, found in ancient Swedish laws – to protect, defend, or from varda – to guard, to protect; from this varda, or, according to another pronunciation, garda, probably comes the word Gardingi, which in ancient Visigothic laws meant the royal bodyguards, hence Garde – guard.

Returning to the mysterious "Rus," it's logical to assume that the Byzantines originally referred to the warriors of the Kievan princes as "ros" ("boat warriors"), regardless of their nationality. Incidentally, this is explicitly stated in the work of the 10th-century Arab geographer Shams al-Din al-Muqaddasi al-Bashshari:

An army from Rum, which is called Rus.

Later, the term "Rus" came to refer to the entire population of the country, regardless of occupation or tribal affiliation. The Arab merchant Abu al-Qasim ibn Hawqal al-Nisibi, mentioned in previous articles, clearly stated this as early as the mid-10th century:

Rus, Khazar and Sarir are the names of states and regions, not people and clans.

Already at the beginning of the 11th century, Yahya ibn Sa'id of Antioch (years of life: about 980 – about 1066) speaks of Vladimir Svyatoslavich as the “king of the Rus”:

The Rus' king married Basil the Bulgar-Slayer's sister after he stipulated that he and all his people—a great nation—be baptized. Basil subsequently sent metropolitans and bishops to him, and they baptized the king and all those within his lands. He also sent his sister to him, who built many churches in the Rus' land. When the marriage was decided between them, the Rus' army also arrived and joined with Basil's Greek forces, and they all set out to fight Bardas Phocas by sea and land at Chrysopolis. They defeated Phocas.

But another Arab author, al-Mas'udi, who lived in the 10th century, calls Dir not a Russian, but a Slavic king:

The first of the Slavic kings is ad-Dir. He has vast cities and numerous lands.

Although Russian chronicles consider Askold and Dir to be Varangians from Rurik’s army, whom Oleg, who was clearly familiar to them, later accused of “insufficient legitimacy.”

Supporters of the "southern" version believe that the word "Rus" comes from an Iranian root meaning "light", "white" (in comparison with the dark-skinned Iranian-speaking population of the northern Black Sea region - the Scythians, Sarmatians, Alans).

There's a good chance that there were two words that sounded roughly the same ("rus," "ros," etc.) but meant different things, i.e., were homonyms. The similarity in sound between these words led to their actualization and merging.

A modern look at the Norman problem


In his modern commentary on A. Strynnholm's seminal work, "Viking Campaigns," Russian historian A. Khlevov makes the following observations:

In domestic stories The question of the participation of Scandinavian warriors in the genesis of the Old Russian state acquired a painful and extremely politicized, emotionally charged form of the so-called Norman problem... The end of the discussion was put by the recognition of the facts that:

a). The settlement of Slavs and Scandinavians among the autochthonous Finns and Balts unfolded almost simultaneously, in opposite directions and had, in principle, the same character (extortion of tribute from the local population with a predominance of the colonization-settlement principle among the Slavs);

b) The state matured quite naturally, without needing any cultural “impetuses”, and initially arose as a mechanism for regulating the tributary-power balance and as a means of organizing transit trade along the Volga route and the Route from the Varangians to the Greeks;

c). The Scandinavians made an important contribution to the development of Ancient Rus' precisely as highly professional warriors, imparting distinctiveness and character to the emerging state and successfully harmonizing with the spiritual component that came from Byzantium.

Academician D.S. Likhachev, by the way, even proposed the term “Scandobyzantium”.

Thus, it can be assumed that people of Scandinavian descent could have been neighbors of the Slavs not only in the north (Ladoga and its environs), but also in the south (the Northern Black Sea region). However, the natural course of events gradually led to their complete assimilation by the more numerous Slavs and the formation of a state entity on this basis, which 19th-century historians gave the conventional (though never actually existing) name "Kievan Rus."
80 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. + 12
    April 15 2026 04: 42
    Thanks Valery, the article was included!
    Now about the Black Sea (or First) Rus'. You correctly noted that it's not the Danes themselves, but their ancestors, who are considered to be the inhabitants of the northern Black Sea region. The answer is obvious: the Goths. Slavic and Gothic tribes coexisted, and this is proven by archaeology. See Chernyakhov culture. The last Goths in Crimea were exterminated by the Tatars on the eve of its annexation by the Russian Empire during the reign of Catherine the Great.
    It is not surprising that Tmutarakan, which suddenly appeared and disappeared, was located in Taman (Kuban).
    The author's work offers many surprising insights, not necessarily Scandinavian ones. However, the role of the "Normans" in the development of our community shouldn't be downplayed either.
    Have a nice day, everyone!
    1. +6
      April 15 2026 08: 17
      Quote: Kote pane Kohanka
      Thanks Valery, the article was included!

      I willingly join in with all four paws :)
    2. +6
      April 15 2026 08: 53
      Quote: Kote pane Kohanka
      However, the role of the “Normans” in the formation of our community should not be downplayed either.

      No one is particularly downplaying it, but there's no need to exaggerate it either. Let's imagine a hypothetical situation: the Normans conquered Rus'. belay What then? Then they introduce their own language or elements of their language, as happened in England, in northern France... And what do we have in Rus'? Old Norse dialects are simply littered with Slavic words. Take Old Swedish: Gräns ​​- border, Torgh - trade, market, Lodhia - boat, and so on. One of these words (I don't remember which) is used in modern Swedish. There are many such words. fellow Conversely, we inherited very few words from the Vikings. The most famous ones that come to mind are: hook, banner, box. But here's where linguists might fall into a trap. Perhaps these are Slavic words, and the Vikings changed them and began using them? For example: a German occupier enters a yard and shouts, "Mleko, yayko, kuru..." And then, in 2241, linguists will look wise. fool They say that the word egg comes from the ancient Germanic word "yajko" lol and so on. We can argue about this endlessly., but the fact remains that there was no "Scandinavianization" of the Old Russian language stop , just as there was no conquest of the Slavic tribes by the Vikings.
      1. +5
        April 15 2026 11: 18
        When conquered by the Scandinavians, Kievan Rus' was expected to enter the hereditary orbit of the Scandinavian kings (claiming the titles and lands of their brothers and ancestors), as was the case in England. Nothing of the sort occurred. Non-Russian princes did not lay claim to Scandinavian lands, nor did Scandinavians lay claim to Russian ones. Indeed, historically, Polish and Lithuanian nobles laid more claim to Rus' titles than Scandinavian ones.
        1. +7
          April 15 2026 11: 27
          So, even in the first article it was written that Rurik's calling was not the foundation of the state or its conquest, but an ordinary episode in the history of Novgorod.
        2. +3
          April 15 2026 11: 27
          Quote: Energetik39
          When conquered by the Scandinavians, Kievan Rus' was expected to enter the hereditary orbit of the Scandinavian kings (claiming the titles and lands of their brothers and ancestors), as was the case in England. Nothing of the sort happened.

          Good idea! good I didn't even think about this topic. recourse hi
    3. +1
      April 23 2026 09: 59
      Quote: Kote pane Kohanka
      However, the role of the "Normans"

      Why did the name "Normans" even appear? During the period in question, these were the same Vikings who received vassal lands in France. We had Danes, Swedes, and Frisians—culturally and geographically distinct tribes. So, it's more likely to be a Scandinavian theory than a Norman one.
  2. +9
    April 15 2026 06: 30
    There is no universal answer to the question, Who are the Rus' (Rus')? It doesn't exist, because every answer to this question will depend on a specific context, defined chronologically or geographically. This name should be discussed not only in cultural or linguistic terms, but also as a political or even economic category of identification. Something like this...
    1. +3
      April 15 2026 08: 10
      Quote: Luminman
      even the economic category of identification

      I completely agree... it is even possible that at the very "dawn" of its origin, this name simply defined, say, the "Svei" who practiced long-distance trade with the East and Byzantium (as an occupation) and somewhat later took on first a territorial, and then a "national" meaning
    2. +4
      April 15 2026 08: 12
      Both the Rus' and the Varangians weren't distinct peoples, but rather estates, social groups. Ethnically, they could be quite diverse. Ethnicity was less important back then; occupation, class, and group membership were far more significant. After all, modern nations simply didn't exist back then; every people was a loose conglomerate of distinct, quite autonomous clans. Therefore, occupation mattered more: warrior, priest, merchant, artisan, and so on.

      In my opinion, the Rus were originally professional warriors. They lived in fortified settlements along the lines of communication of the time, i.e., along riverbeds, since rivers were the main transportation arteries. Hence their name. Trade and military units moved along rivers. Therefore, all Rus cities were almost always located by rivers, and every city was initially a fortress, which is why cities (walled, fortified settlements) are called such. As for the Varangians, they were essentially seafaring warriors. The Rus primarily moved by rivers, the Varangians by sea. The Rus were a service class, subordinate to a specific ruler (prince), who was also responsible for their education and training. The Varangians were more free, existing according to the principles of "military democracy" and could elect their own leaders from among their peers. Essentially, they were analogous to the later Cossacks. They didn't necessarily have to serve anyone in particular; they could become mercenaries or even pirates and robbers.
      1. +1
        April 15 2026 12: 10
        Quote: Illanatol
        Both the Rus' and the Varangians were not separate peoples, but rather estates, social groups. Ethnically, they could be quite diverse.

        I'm interested in Lomonosov's perspective. Mikhail Vasilyevich relied on the version set out in the Nikon Chronicle during the reign of Ivan the Terrible—that Rurik and his brothers were summoned from Prussia.Lomonosov believed that the Rus were a distorted version of Prussians and that they were Slavs. Further research has brilliantly confirmed his theory that the Prussians are Slavs! good Now about the Varangians. Okay, Lomonosov, a super patriot, an interested party. Let's then listen to someone who was by no means fond of the Russians. Back in the 16th century, the German ambassador to Moscow, Herberstein, wrote about Varangians, that they were Slavs - natives of the region of Wagria in the north of present-day Germany. For me personally, the Prussians, Rus', and Varangians are, if not the same thing, then at least closely related Slavic ethnic groups that harmoniously intertwined with the East Slavic tribes. This immediately resolves a whole cluster of questions.
        1. +1
          April 15 2026 13: 20
          Lomonosov is the other extreme, the extreme "hurray-patriotism", and if the documents contradict his views, then so much the worse for the documents.
          1. 0
            April 15 2026 20: 17
            Quote: vet
            Lomonosov is the other extreme, the extreme "hurray-patriotism", and if the documents contradict his views, then so much the worse for the documents.

            A little in defense of M. Lomonosov. He drew his conclusions from the wealth of knowledge available to him.
            The Scythian-Roksolani-Rosa parallel is obvious at first glance, but is not confirmed by modern archeology.
            Such misconceptions are not uncommon.
            For example, V. Tatishchev considered the Finns to be descendants of the Sarmatians.
            1. 0
              April 16 2026 00: 04
              Was Buyan Island Russian?
              1. +2
                April 16 2026 23: 28
                If we take into account that Buyan-Ruyan-Rügen was, until 1168 (when it was conquered by the Danish king Voldemar I), a religious center of the Western Slavs (the sanctuary of Svyatovit in Arkona), an independent state (Prince Jaromir), which collected tribute from the mainland German tribes. But even after this, Slavic statehood was preserved (the inhabitants were forced to convert to Catholicism) and the last Slavic prince, Vseslav, died in 1325. After which, as a result of a dynastic marriage, the island became part of the Principality of Pomerania-Wolgast,
              2. +2
                April 16 2026 23: 34
                If we take into account that Buyan-Ruyan-Rügen was, until 1168 (when it was conquered by the Danish king Voldemar I), a religious center of the Western Slavs (the sanctuary of Svyatovit in Arkona), an independent state (Prince Jaromir), which took tribute from the mainland German tribes - it was not Russian, but Slavic ... But even after this, Slavic statehood was preserved (the inhabitants were forced to convert to Catholicism) and the last Slavic prince Vseslav died in 1325. After which, as a result of a dynastic marriage, the island became part of the Principality of Pomerania-Wolgast, after which, by the 16th century, the Slavic population gradually disappeared as a result of wars and dissolution among the German tribes.
          2. -2
            April 16 2026 08: 27
            More likely, that's what the "Müllers" did. Well, they didn't stand on ceremony with documents and chronicles even under Peter the Great, and maybe even earlier. Especially since there was a struggle against the Old Believers, and anyone who wrote before Nikon was an Old Believer by definition.

            As if "hurrah-patriotism" were something unique to Russia. The Saxons were also extolled to the extreme in chronicles. They were declared descendants of Alexander the Great's warriors, uber-minors by definition. Well, you can't praise yourself... others don't care.
      2. +3
        April 15 2026 12: 42
        Quote: Illanatol
        The Rus' moved mainly by rivers, the Varangians by sea.

        The first provided long-distance trade in Eastern Europe, the second, also known as Vikings (Vikingar), represented associations for piracy and robbery, and, by the way, there was another “class” known under the name of “Varangians”, these were Scandinavian mercenaries in the service of the Byzantine Emperor
        1. +2
          April 15 2026 12: 49
          Well, it's believed that the Vikings founded entire states. That's unlikely, of course; it's more likely they simply seized power in existing states, kicking out the previous ruler. But it seems they did have some skill in governance and weren't simply thugs and robbers. In Scandinavia, the earls there were appanage princes, each with his own city, a sort of mini-state, where he wielded unlimited power.

          As for the Varangians... the Byzantines simply lumped the Varangians and Vikings together, since both were simply barbarians to them; classifying them as such was considered beneath the civilized Romans... savages, what can you expect. Especially since they didn't look all that different. And what's the point? To them, the Varangians were simply mercenaries, as long as they were good with a sword. When they die, we'll buy new ones. laughing
          1. +2
            April 15 2026 14: 08
            Quote: Illanatol
            kicking out the previous ruler. But it seems they still had some management skills and weren't just thugs and robbers.

            In fact, these campaigns represent a very interesting page in history... these bands (sometimes the size of an entire army) were quite autonomous in the military and social sense, even staying for years, then "dissolving" (leaving, forming new bands)... there are also known cases (what you are talking about), when the "chief" endowed the supporters with land and they remained (north and east of England), and Hrolf became Rollo - the first Duke of Normandy, but this had little to do with the "great army" of 865/866, which hunted for 13 years and then went to northern France and Belgium

            Quote: Illanatol
            The Byzantines simply lumped the Varangians and the Vikings together, since both were simply barbarians to them.

            I disagree with you here (except that the Byzantines considered them all barbarians) - the Byzantines identified those who attacked Constantinople in 860 as Rus' (but the Rus' alone could not have provided the described number of ships and "personnel", i.e. there were Vikings with Rus', possibly Vikings under the command of Rus'), and the Varangians were Varangians :)
            1. 0
              April 16 2026 08: 40
              Hrolf became Rollo? Or the other way around? He was Rollo initially, but after becoming a count, then a duke, he became Ralph de Marcher.

              So how did the Varangians differ from the Vikings and Varangians? Was it their attire or their skulls that were different?

              Well, regarding the armadas described in the chronicles... you don't even have to divide by 10, but by more. It's long been noted that the further back in history you go, the more fleets multiply, so there were many more ships at Salamis than at Lepanto, even though almost 2 years separate them, and humanity as a whole before the Common Era was smaller than Europe alone at the time of the Battle of Lepanto.
              Tradition, however, is still observed in our time, and the Iranian Navy, destroyed by the Yankees, is miraculously multiplying retroactively.

              The Byzantines identified... it's already been written about here that "Rus" may not have originally been a specific people, but rather a designation for people with a certain way of life and occupation. Well, they could have written: a large fleet of pirates attacked, and who these pirates were—that was secondary, they didn't really bother, there was no time. They should have prepared ships with Greek fire or whatever else the Romans used to fight back.
      3. 0
        6 May 2026 21: 15
        The author writes of Prince Vladimir, Tsar of the Rus': "And when the marriage was decided between them, the Rus' troops also arrived and joined with the Greek troops of Tsar Basil, and they all set out to fight Bardas Phocas by sea and land to Chrysopolis. And they defeated Phocas." If the Rus' are warriors, then Vladimir is the king of warriors (somehow illogical). If the Rus' are warriors, then who are the "troops of the Rus'"? (again, illogical)...
        1. 0
          7 May 2026 08: 53
          The text is given in translation, the translation may not be entirely adequate.
          Troops of the Rus or troops from the Rus?
          Vladimir—was he really a tsar? The word "tsar" wasn't particularly used in Rus' back then; there were princes. Scandinavians might have called him a "konung," while the Turks or Khazars might have called him a "khagan."
          So, initially, Vladimir was simply a military leader, a privileged member of the warrior caste. Our society was already caste-based back then (which is reflected in Russian fairy tales... there, three brothers always act as representatives of the three main castes... much like the biblical Shem, Afet, and Ham).

          In ancient Greek sources, kings were those who were, in fact, the leaders of the tribe and lived in their own "palace" with sheep and goats.

          In short, all this is unconvincing.
          Moreover, the Greeks could well consider foreign warriors a separate people; they judged them extremely superficially, without much concern.
          If the Scythians-Skolots preferred to fight on horseback, they were definitely nomads. The fact that the Greeks purchased grain en masse from these "nomads" in the Black Sea region (specifically through Olbia) is a detail unworthy of the attention of the Greek sages. laughing
    3. Fat
      +4
      April 15 2026 08: 48
      hi I agree. All theories are interesting, and it's possible that other approaches to the issue at hand will emerge.
      Personally, I liked the option with boat rowers - Rosy (Rusy), it seemed logical.
      With respect.
  3. +5
    April 15 2026 07: 19
    Based on a completely different principle, namely, economic management.
    Ancient economy of the Balkans and Greece:
    1. Field, plowing with oxen.
    2. Pig farming.
    3. Small cattle, goats, yarn.

    Rome pushes out the Gauls, Dacians, Thracians, and Illyrians.
    The Illyrians, Macedonians, Thracians, and Dacians disappear along with their languages.
    Instead, the Slavs appear beyond the Danube.
    They "prowl the forests and mountains," in the forested zone of famine, and, together with the Avars, attempt to attack the Balkans. A pool of tribes returning to the Balkans is formed—the Southern Slavs.
    Their farm during their time beyond the Danube:
    1. Small cattle.
    2. Pig farming.
    (Field cultivation has failed, they are driven into the forest zone).

    Discovery of a new form of farming - slash-and-burn agriculture.
    This is a way to transfer crop production to forest areas.
    The rapid spread of ploughmen along river beds begins.
    A pool of Western and Eastern Slavs is being formed.
    Their names are often associated with slash-and-burn agriculture:
    Glades/Poles (burn forest-burn-glade-field.)
    Rus' (blond-light-Rus' is a bright place in the zone of dark forests = "space transformed by plowmen").
    The tribes of forest dwellers, the Drevlyans, and cow herders, the Vyatichi, migrate to Rus', and some Sarmatians migrate as warriors.
    The "Russians" appear = tribes that adopted the arable form of farming.

    The Western Slavs come into contact with the Germans and are partially mixed or assimilated.

    The original conglomerate of Balkan languages ​​is divided into three branches of Slavic languages ​​and Balto-Slavic.

    When farmers followed the riverbeds to Lake Ladoga, they came into contact with river warriors/robbers/fishermen in boats. As they mixed, the language of the arable people prevailed.
  4. +4
    April 15 2026 07: 56
    The argument is that Svyatoslav shaved his head, which means he is a strong Russian.

    What kind of hairstyle did Igor have?
    1. +3
      April 15 2026 08: 10
      Another question is how exactly Svyatoslav shaved his head. In fact, the source simply mentions a long mustache and a tuft of hair on the crown of his head. This doesn't at all evoke the typical Zaporozhian appearance. It's entirely possible that his mustache was pointed like Budyonny's, and his hair was mop-topped. Then Svyatoslav would look identical to the Massagetan warrior from the Pazyryk carpet. In other words, he would have a steppe-style appearance.
      1. +4
        April 15 2026 09: 10
        So I'm thinking about a hairdressing manual from ancient times. And the peculiarities of the skull's structure.

        It is not for nothing that Pericles was depicted wearing a helmet.
        1. +5
          April 15 2026 09: 22
          In any case, Svyatoslav's appearance, according to eyewitness accounts, bears no resemblance to the Scandinavian. First, his shaved beard, which is a real disgrace. Recall from Njal's Saga, whose sparse beard was deeply embarrassing. And the whole mess began precisely after one woman made a very offensive remark about it. Second, his shaved head. As we know from those same Saxon sources, Scandinavians wore long hair and were very proud of it. Only slaves had their heads shaved. Third, his clothing: a Scandinavian warrior could only wear dyed clothing, and a nobleman was required to wear bright, expensive colors and high-quality fabric. Undyed linen—again, the exclusive domain of slaves. Fourth, a Scandinavian leader simply had to have jewelry, especially bracelets with neck rings. Svyatoslav only has an earring, which, by the way, is also completely uncharacteristic for Scandinavians, who considered this kind of female adornment simply shameful for a man...

          And after this, we're told Svyatoslav was some kind of Scandinavian king!! Or his descendant! The entire valiant hird would have spat at the sight of such a leader. It's like if we were to appoint a downright gay man as battalion commander in the North-Eastern Front, and in full combat gear, no less—with makeup, a handbag, and tights.
          1. +4
            April 15 2026 09: 28
            Svyatoslav, judging even by his name, was not a Scandinavian king. And there were no Scandinavians in his retinue—Slavs and descendants of Oleg the Prophet's Scandinavians, as well as those born of mixed marriages. And the "fashion" among his retinue, apparently, had already changed. Like the Cossacks who, in the Caucasus, donned Circassian coats and began to resemble highlanders.
            1. +4
              April 15 2026 09: 40
              The question of fashion is debatable here. In those days, kinship was strictly measured and extended across generations. All the way back to Odin. So imagine this: a noble Scandinavian chieftain arrives in Rus' with his hird to hire himself out, and suddenly he's met by his fourth cousin on his grandmother's side, dressed in such a shabby outfit... It's a disgrace to the entire family; everyone in Scandinavia will laugh at what the once glorious Ynglings have come to...
              1. +3
                April 15 2026 09: 43
                It's usually the one hiring who laughs. But the hired one isn't advised to laugh—a lucrative contract could fall through or its terms could deteriorate dramatically. Besides, Svyatoslav was likely already clearly perceived by the Scandinavians as a foreign ruler. And "one doesn't enter a foreign monastery with one's own rules"—be it in Rus' or Byzantium.
                1. +3
                  April 15 2026 09: 57
                  I don't think so. An Yngling is still an Yngling, no matter how many generations have passed. And here, supposedly, only two. Back then, kinship was reckoned hundreds of years back, but origins were remembered. They'd laugh—in Scandinavia, a hired chieftain might, of course, not show any sign of it. But does that make it any easier? Rumors of disgrace would have spread...

                  Speaking of memory, there's a classic example: when the Spartan king Agesilaus was told in Athens that Dorians were supposedly forbidden from entering the local temples, he replied, "I'm not a Dorian, I'm an Achaean." That is, a full 500 years later, they remembered the origins of at least one of the Spartan royal dynasties. A tribal society has a looooong memory for such things...
                  1. +2
                    April 15 2026 10: 04
                    Svyatoslav's son Vladimir, who captured Kyiv with the help of Swedish mercenaries, was a foreign prince to the Scandinavians. Why then was his father Svyatoslav, who apparently never even visited Ladoga, let alone Uppsala, considered one of their own? Neither the legendary Rurik nor the real-life Oleg were important or significant figures at home, so prominent that the authors of the sagas would remember their genealogies, but they became so once they were in Rus'.
                    1. +1
                      April 15 2026 10: 09
                      Who knows who's been where. A relative, right? They don't forget that. And Svyatoslav—according to some sources—actually reigned in Novgorod, or at least in that region, during the papacy. Consequently, he simply couldn't help but interact closely with Scandinavians, including his supposed relatives. And he knew their customs intimately.
                      1. +1
                        April 15 2026 13: 18
                        Svyatoslav - it seems, according to some sources, did reign in Novgorod during the Pope's reign,

                        He was a young child at the time of Igor's death, and immediately became the nominal prince of Kyiv during Olga's reign.
                    2. 0
                      April 17 2026 00: 44
                      Why is Rurik legendary? There is a theory that Rurik was the son of the Polabian prince Godlav from today's Mecklenburg lands... a very historical figure...
          2. +3
            April 15 2026 12: 49
            With a shaved head and forelock, he looks like a Thracian. This fundamentally contradicts the official story that Slavs have no ancient ancestors.
        2. +3
          April 15 2026 09: 22
          In any case, Svyatoslav's appearance, according to eyewitness accounts, bears no resemblance to Scandinavian at all. First, his shaved beard, which is a real disgrace. Recall from Njal's Saga, whose sparse beard was deeply embarrassing. And the whole mess started after one woman made a very offensive remark about it. Second, his shaved head. As we know from those same Saxon sources, Scandinavians wore long hair and were very proud of it. Only slaves had their heads shaved. Third, his clothing: a Scandinavian warrior could only wear dyed clothing, and a nobleman was required to wear bright, expensive colors and high-quality fabric. Undyed linen—again, the exclusive domain of slaves. Fourth, a Scandinavian leader simply had to have jewelry, especially bracelets and neck rings. Svyatoslav only has an earring, which, by the way, is also completely uncharacteristic for Scandinavians, who considered this kind of female adornment simply shameful for a man...

          And after this, we're told Svyatoslav was some kind of Scandinavian king!! Or his descendant! The entire valiant hird would have spat at the sight of such a leader. It's like if we were to appoint a downright gay man as battalion commander in the North Caucasus Military District, and in full combat gear, no less—with makeup, a lace-embellished flak jacket, and tights.
        3. +3
          April 15 2026 09: 29
          It is not for nothing that Pericles was depicted wearing a helmet.

          I don't know about Pericles, but the Spartans wore their hair exceptionally long and took great care of it, meticulously combing and tidying it before battle. This really pissed off the other Greeks, so much so that references to this custom are found in many sources.
          1. +1
            April 15 2026 15: 13
            Pericles was even called "onion-headed" because of the shape of his head.
    2. +4
      April 15 2026 09: 02
      What kind of hairstyle did Igor have?

      Apparently, there's no information about Igor's hairstyle. Just imagine what a fantastic article would be about the evolution of princely hairstyles from Oleg to Vladimir Monomakh. And if it were revealed that the princes of Galich, Kyiv, Novgorod, and Ryazan had different hairstyles—that's the topic of a dissertation, not an article!
  5. +6
    April 15 2026 08: 16
    The state matured quite naturally, without needing any cultural “impetus,” and initially arose as a mechanism for regulating the tributary-power balance and as a means of organizing transit trade along the Volga route and the Route from the Varangians to the Greeks.

    a very plausible thesis, which, by the way, has a much more "modern" analogy - the Hudson's Bay Company in North America... but at that time, a very developed and truly state-like structure, which only lacked a political superstructure, never developed into a separately formed state
  6. +3
    April 15 2026 08: 21
    There's a brilliant work by Lovmiansky, "Rus' and the Normans." The author first analyzes the toponyms of places where Scandinavian presence was certain, such as Danelaw and Normandy, and then Rus'. In the former, at least a third of the toponyms end in -bu and -vil, and also include the names of Scandinavian owners or Norse gods. In the latter, there's NOT a SINGLE such example. Indeed, show me a single Torvill, Sigurdbu, or the village of Björnovka with the small town of Olaf in our region. That's all you need to know about the so-called Scandinavian conquest of Rus' and the origins of the Rus'.
    1. +3
      April 15 2026 17: 00
      By your logic, if we have a plethora of toponyms of Finno-Ugric origin, then it was the Finno-Ugrians who conquered Rus' and all Rus' descended from them. Ridiculous! laughing
      Well, if you think about it, the Scandinavians, mainly the Danes, came en masse to England, where they conquered a fairly large part of it and settled there. That is, there were many of them, and they stewed in their own juices for quite a long time in this Danelaw of theirs and all that. Hence the place names of Scandinavian origin, plus it's worth remembering that the Angles and Saxons had also come to Britain a little earlier, from practically the same places, and also settled there.
      Rus' wasn't conquered by Scandinavians. They provided a princely family and a retinue to establish and maintain order in the key trading hubs along the route from the Varangians to the Greeks, and quickly disappeared into the overwhelming Slavic population. And they simply had no need to name any cities with Scandinavian names. Why? Trade was already going well with local place names; the main thing was that merchants knew them and came often.
      So, look for the town of Olaf and Torvill somewhere else, where the Scandinavian conquest actually took place.
  7. +4
    April 15 2026 09: 32
    Academician D.S. Likhachev, by the way, even proposed the term “Scandobyzantium”.


    But there is such a thing as the "Ynglinga Saga." Written in Old Icelandic, presumably between 1220 and 1230, the saga's author is the Icelander Snorri Sturluson. The Ynglings were the very first dynasty; the first Yngling was from the Vanir tribe, adopted by Odin himself.
    This saga was Thor Heyerdahl's bedside book; he even used its information to conduct excavations on the lower Don River and the Caspian Sea coast. The northern Black Sea region, according to Heyerdahl, was the origin of the Viking royal dynasties.

    In one of his works, the young Russian historian Evgeny Vladimirovich Pchelov, drawing on information from this saga, provides details of the legendary and initial stages of the Rurik tribe's origins. The tables he compiled chart the genealogy of the Ynglings, one of the most ancient families not only in Scandinavia but throughout Europe, which produced many kings (konungs) of medieval Sweden and Norway. According to legends preserved in the sagas, the Ynglings descended from the god Odin himself, his son Yngvi, and his grandson Njord, the god of the seas. According to another, more realistic version, a certain Ingjald and his wife Gerd were the founders of this family.
    Another branch of the family tree produced a whole galaxy of Swedish kings. The founder of both branches was King Ingvar, whose name, in its Russified form—Igor—became widespread among Rurik's descendants. The grandson of the first Ingvar, Rathbard, was married to Aud the Rich. Perhaps after her husband's early death, Aud remarried to Hroerik (Rurik) the Ring-Thrower, the ancestor of Rurik (Hroerik) of Novgorod, from whom the numerous Rurik tribe descends.

    It's a pity, of course, but it looks like we'll never know the truth.
    1. +2
      April 15 2026 09: 49
      Russified form – Igor

      So where did the character Ingvar Igorevich come from? And anyway, the names Igor and Ingvar were used quite interchangeably...

      One could well have been an Alan who came from the North Caucasus with his retinue during the Great Migration. He's also known as an "Ace," which is what Ossetians were called in Rus' for a long time. Then there's Rollo, also known as Hrolf the Walker, who justified his claim to Normandy by claiming the graves of his Alan ancestors, who settled there as federates during the late Roman Empire. I honestly don't remember the source, as it's been so long, and I'm too lazy to look, but it's somewhere in the sagas or the Frankish chroniclers. Just like the Vanir—clearly Slavic Wends—the Evon—the Finns still call us Venaa.
      1. +2
        April 15 2026 09: 54
        the names Igor and Ingvar were used quite in parallel

        There's nothing surprising here. The names Ksenia and its derivatives, Oksana and Aksinya, are also used in parallel in Russia.
        1. -1
          April 15 2026 10: 01
          Of course. Your example is common folk names. They could be shortened and mangled as much as they wanted. But a prince's name is a political matter. It was given in memory of illustrious ancestors, thereby laying claim to their inheritance. Such liberties weren't allowed here, at least in the 10th-13th centuries. A prince like Garik Yarikovich instead of Igor Yaroslavich—well, that's no channel at all.
          1. +1
            April 15 2026 10: 11
            Why then does Oleg tell Askold and Dir: this Ingvar, a Russian prince. Later, Ingvar is transformed into Igor in the chronicles. A clear Russification (or Slavicization) of the name.
            1. 0
              6 May 2026 21: 29
              The Tale of Bygone Years makes no direct mention of Oleg telling Askold and Dir the phrase "This is Ingvar, Prince of Russia." In the chronicle account, Oleg addresses Askold and Dir with the words, "You are not princes and not of princely lineage, but I am of princely lineage," and then shows the infant Igor, calling him the son of Rurik.
      2. +3
        April 15 2026 10: 02
        Quote: paul3390
        He is also an ace - and this is what Ossetians were called in Rus' for a long time.

        The first Yngling of the Vanir tribe was captured by the Aesir, and the Aesir Odin adopted him. So it goes according to the Saga.
        1. +1
          April 15 2026 10: 06
          Really? Maybe so, I can't remember. But firstly, he's definitely not Scandinavian, and secondly, if you're officially adopted into the clan, you're already an Alan. In those days, it was like this: if you were adopted, you were already a member of the adoptive father's clan by all accounts. It didn't matter who you were born as.
      3. +1
        April 15 2026 19: 55
        The Alans, it seems, during the time of Rome, were located right on the site of Paris?
  8. -5
    April 15 2026 10: 02
    Thus, in the famous phrase "the Varangian tribe Rus" from The Tale of Bygone Years, the chronicler may have been merely explaining to his readers the Varangians' occupation. However, later readers came to believe that this was the name of a specific Varangian tribe.

    Yes, in this way you can fit a lot of owls on the globe lol
  9. 0
    April 15 2026 10: 57
    Supporters of this version believe that in the East the Scandinavians called themselves Rus (rowers) because here they could not use their traditional “long ships”

    It should be said that the Scandinavians themselves did not know any “people of Ros”: they called themselves Swedes, Danes, Normans, and Kievan Rus by the word “Gardariki”

    They called themselves Rus, but had no idea about them?
    1. +3
      April 15 2026 11: 05
      They didn't call it that - they were called that.
      1. 0
        April 15 2026 11: 29
        Supporters of this version believe that in the East the Scandinavians called themselves Rus'

        Everyone called them Swedes, Danes, Normans. Even Nestor himself writes about it.
      2. Fat
        +3
        April 15 2026 11: 35
        hi
        Quote: vet
        They didn't call it that - they were called that.

        Here's the thought that comes to mind. If the Rus' (Rus) travel by water, they inevitably use portages, and they could establish control over the most convenient ones, leaving a "service team" in place. Then a notional Russian land emerges, where the "rowers" rule, establishing permanent settlements.
        1. +3
          April 15 2026 12: 38
          These Rus' were probably here from the start, emerging from the general population as a sort of elite. Yes, they established control over communications, both for defense (enemies also came by rivers; they simply couldn't have done so any other way) and for economic activity. They charged foreign merchants for passage along the rivers. They traded with merchants... and how else could merchants bring goods into the country if not by river? There were no roads, only animal trails. Cities were trading hubs. And to buy from foreigners, they needed their own goods to exchange. So they collected taxes (polyudye) from locals in kind: grain, furs, and the like. Thus, gradually, centers of statehood, power, and so on, were formed.

          And it's entirely possible that this happened long before the first documented Viking raids. However, the Scandinavian Vikings didn't just appear out of nowhere; they had their predecessors.
  10. +2
    April 15 2026 11: 43
    Russia (the name of Rus' in the language of the Roman Empire at the time) emerged as a Varangian community and later as a state on the Baltic, a mixture of Scandinavians, northern Ilmen Slavs, and Pomors. Its first capital was Staraya Ladoga, its second was Novgorod. Nordic Northern Rus' advanced on the swarthy southern city of Kyiv under its second prince, Oleg, and took it by force in 882 to establish and control the Northern Trade Flow of the time. Today's Russia has a distinctly northern Nordic ethnic, historical, and cultural foundation, a passion for war, a strong state, and empire-building; even the Northern Trade Flow to the Baltic has been preserved.
  11. +3
    April 15 2026 12: 20
    Quote: Thick
    Personally, I liked the option with boat rowers - Rosy (Rusy), it seemed logical.


    The Vikings were also likely rowers. "Ing"—this suffix entered the English language by forming one of the verb forms (extended action). So the word "Viking" referred to an activity characteristic of these people, most likely rowing. After all, this was what they did most during their sea voyages. The rigging of the longships wasn't particularly sophisticated, the wind wasn't always favorable, and in bays and large rivers, only oars were possible.

    Probably, the living conditions, everyday life, and other things among the Scandinavians and Slavs of the northeast were similar, and their activities and preferences were also similar.
  12. -3
    April 15 2026 12: 29
    Quote: vet
    Why is his father Svyatoslav, who, it seems, has never even been to Ladoga, not to mention Uppsala, one of his own?


    If he truly was one of our own, should he have worshiped the gods, the Scandinavians' own? And there's evidence that Svyatoslav worshiped Odin, Thor, Freya, or perhaps Loki? He was a pagan, though his mother suggested he convert to Christianity. And why did his bastard son, Vladimir, decide to create a pantheon of gods in Kyiv, include Slavic ones? Or were Perun and Veles Scandinavian gods?
    Alas, we see too little Scandinavian or Normanism in our ancestors. In England, for example, the Scandinavians left more traces in the culture and language (even the days of the week are named after the Norse gods). Well, the Russians inherited some rather shy Scandinavians... laughing
    1. +3
      April 16 2026 19: 06
      Hmm. The Scandinavians, as devout pagans, understood perfectly well that other lands were ruled by other gods. And when they arrived in these foreign lands, they even removed the images of snakes and other beasts from the prows of their ships and began praying to the local gods. This purely practical approach to the gods was characteristic of paganism in general, not just the Scandinavians.
      That is why Vladimir created his own pantheon, not only from supposedly Slavic gods, but from those whose worship could obviously bring benefit to him and his people.
      Now let's see who he placed on the temple, not counting the idol of Veles, which was located elsewhere, perhaps lower down, in Kyiv's Podil. Incidentally, modern scholars of Slavic paganism—not just nerds, but scientists—are inclined to believe that the animal god Veles entered the Slavic pantheon from their southern neighbors... the Byzantines, having been transformed from Blasius of Sebaste, a Christian saint and patron of domestic and wild animals.
      So:
      Perun is the supreme thunder god, patron of the prince and his retinue, and the god of war and fertility. His idol was described as wooden, with a silver head and golden mustache. For some reason, a deity with this name is found only among the Eastern Slavs; the Western and Southern Slavs have no gods with this name. However, the Balts do have one – Perkunas. And the Balts are the closest neighbors of the Eastern Slavs.
      Khors is the god of the sun or moon. The etymology of this word is very unclear. It has a strong Iranian flavor. For example, an Ossetian mother says to her child, "ma khur" - "my sun." So, khur/khor means "sun" in Ossetian. Or there's another suitable word - "khorz" (pronounced as horzh), "good." Isn't it a name for a deity? However, there are other options.
      Dazhbog is a deity revered as the god of the sun, light, heavenly fire, and fertility, a giver of blessings. This deity is most likely a purely Slavic one.
      Stribog is an East Slavic god of wind or god of waters.
      Semargl is a winged dog, supposedly a guardian of something, but his functions are not entirely clear. A very obscure deity, the prevailing scholarly interpretation of Simargl is that it is the Iranian mythical creature Simurgh, the king of birds in the form of an eagle, adopted by the Slavs. Among the Iranian peoples, Simurgh served as a benevolent protector of individuals and especially human groups. And trade at that time was conducted precisely by such groups. So, it is quite possible that this Semargl was the deity of trading groups, commerce, and had protective functions not only for crops.
      Mokosh is the only female deity in the pantheon, associated with typical female occupations, especially spinning. She also seems to be a purely Slavic deity.
      So what do we have? We have Vladimir's perfectly clear pragmatic position in choosing these gods. He had absolutely no need for the Scandinavian gods, as they had no power there. They don't exist. But there are the Slavic gods, since, aside from his retinue, there are only Slavs around. And there are some other deities who were important to Vladimir at the time. For example, Perun, who could easily have been slain by the Balts. Or Khors and Semargl, who, one possibility, could have facilitated closer communication with merchants from the eastern lands.
      Well, let's not forget that a little more time will pass, and all of them will be replaced by one Christian god.
      So, it's not about Scandinavians being shy, but about pragmatism. We need to understand!
      1. 0
        April 17 2026 08: 14
        Quote: MikMichel
        And, arriving in these foreign lands, they even removed images of snakes and other animals from the bows of their ships and began to pray to the local gods.


        Oh, come on. Maybe when they arrived as traders or simply mercenaries, as subordinates to the local ruler... but certainly not when they arrived as hegemons, when they had superiority over the locals, not when they began to rule.

        Take England, for example. Scandinavians ruled this country and left many traces, including in the religious sphere.
        A megalithic burial mound still remains in England, nicknamed "Völund's Forge." It was this Völund who forged the famous sword Excalibur.
        Völund is one of the most ancient gods of Scandinavia, a colleague of Hephaestus and Svarog. He existed in Asgard before Odin.

        One might recall the goddess Hel, daughter of Loki. She was well known in England. It is believed that the word "hell" comes from the name of this Scandinavian goddess.

        And as has been said, the English name the days of the week after the Norse gods, Friday in particular after the goddess Freya. Such is the "pragmatism."
        Wherever the Scandinavians could wield real power, they brought their gods and the power of those gods. It's just that the Scandinavians never ruled in Rus'.
        And yes, Veles is a truly Slavic name; the Byzantines are out of the question. Especially since Veles was more reminiscent of a demon, an antagonist of Perun. It's the pagan motifs that creep into Christian symbols, not the other way around. And the image of our capital's coat of arms is very ancient, pre-Christian. It was the priests who invented the story about Saint George slaying the dragon with a spear. In reality, it was Perun who fought Veles, who took the form of a serpent-dragon, after Veles stole Perun's wife.
        1. +1
          April 17 2026 18: 42
          Sure, you're a bit familiar with Scandinavian myths and tales of King Arthur, but you don't know the history. The Angles and Saxons came to Britain in exactly the same way as the Danes, only a little earlier, about 300 years earlier, from roughly the same places. They were also pagans, and, oddly enough (not really), they had the same pantheon of gods. They retained their pagan beliefs for some time after Christianization, especially among the common people. For example, the "Völund's Forge" you mentioned in Oxfordshire got its name from the Saxons. The first written mention of this name is found in a land transfer document from the parish of Compton Beauchamp in 908, which was later certified by the seal of King Eadred. So, the Scandinavians had nothing to do with it. Hence the names of the days of the week, etc. And yes, let me remind you again: the Danes in England came en masse to the conquered lands and settled there permanently. Hence their Danelaw and all that. So, they not only moved their families there, but also established their own laws, which means they brought their gods along with them. Unlike the Rus', who didn't settle in the future Rus' as invaders at all, and in much smaller numbers, and took local Slavic wives for themselves, which is why they quickly became Slavicized, favoring the local deities, who, in their view, were more helpful in trade and all other matters.
          If you want to understand history, then study history, and not just fairy tales, legends and myths.
          1. 0
            April 18 2026 08: 21
            In fact, the Germanic tribes of the Angles and Saxons are the closest relatives of the Scandinavians, and the Danes are Scandinavians themselves. The Germanic tribes themselves were influenced by the Scandinavians, though mutually. And the Scandinavians certainly played a role. There was little difference in their behavior in the conquered territories. All these tribes arrived as invaders, and there weren't many of them initially compared to the natives. They also took local women, which was natural (they couldn't be bothered to bring their own), and all these newcomers made a huge contribution to the language and culture, effectively displacing the local equivalents.

            As for Rus', in general, supporters of the Scandinavian version insisted that the Scandinavians came as a superior race, as culturologists to the local savages and, having superiority, were quite free to impose both culture and language on the local natives.

            By and large, there's no difference between pagans and Christians, especially the early Christians, who were yesterday's pagans. They behaved the same way, imposing their views by force if they gained power. Power allows you to change many things, and that's a secondary consideration: whether you seized power by force or had it handed to you on a silver platter ("Come and rule us, we consent").

            A classic example is our Prince Vladimir, who baptized Rus' after being baptized himself. So why didn't he limit himself to just his own person? Sure, he converted to Christianity, so let it remain his personal choice. But no... he effectively began to force Byzantine Christianity on his subjects, disregarding their inner convictions and devotion to their former faith. After all, it's only priests who tell us that the adoption of Christianity was quick and painless; in reality, Rus' was baptized with fire and sword, and it took a long time (Novgorod long remembered Dobrynya). So, the imposition, sometimes by harsh methods, of a way of life, faith (or ideology), and so on, on their subjects (or conquered, subjugated peoples) by the elite is a general rule that we can observe even in the modern era.
          2. -3
            April 18 2026 08: 30
            Quote: MikMichel
            Unlike the Rus', who settled in the future Rus' not as invaders at all, and in much smaller numbers, and took local Slavic wives for themselves, which is why they quickly became Slavicized, giving preference to local deities, who, according to their concepts, were more helpful in trade and all other matters.


            1. There is no reason to consider Scandinavians as Rus', and Scandinavians as Rus'.
            2. Give more examples of such unprecedented tolerance by Scandinavian Vikings in any other country. Where else did these stern Vikings sail, willingly assimilate with the locals, adopting their culture, religion, and even language, abandoning their own... I wish you luck, you'll need it.
            1. +2
              April 19 2026 23: 51
              Yes, please. Rollo's Vikings in Normandy. They readily assimilated with the locals, adopting their culture, religion, and even language, abandoning their own. As a result, England was conquered in 1066 not by Vikings or Normans, but by Normans, Catholics who spoke French. And they continued to speak this language long after the conquest of England. French, not Danish, not Saxon.
              1. -1
                7 May 2026 08: 39
                Really? The Normans in Normandy didn't assimilate with the locals; they effectively remained a closed caste, viewing the locals as bipedal cattle and treating them accordingly.
                Even much later, French aristocrats (not only those of Norman descent) explained their privileged status by claiming they were descendants of foreign conquerors, so local commoners (descendants of the Gauls and Celts) had to dance on tiptoe to them. The French Revolution also had the hallmarks of a national liberation movement; it's no coincidence that even revolutionaries readily used the country's ancient name, Gaul. The Great French Revolution was so brutal in France partly because the parties involved didn't see each other as compatriots—they viewed these aristocrats and the "despicable rabble" as different peoples.
                The Normans adopted their religion from Rome, from the papacy, not from the locals. Norman culture long retained its distinctiveness and differed from the general French culture. The language, too, developed its own dialect, called "Old French," containing a large number of Normanisms. And the conquerors of England spoke this dialect, which modern French speakers would have great difficulty understanding.

                William the Conqueror himself, in a letter to Harald (his future enemy), explicitly stated that despite his conversion to Christianity, he remained a Viking at heart, and therefore his generosity was unsustainable. He proved this by his subsequent actions after the victory at Hastings. Dividing the country like a pie among one's accomplices isn't exactly Christian, however. Nor did the Normans treat the defeated Saxons very much in accordance with the precepts of Christ, even the Saxon nobility. So it's not surprising that matters escalated to direct military confrontation under John Lackland (the aforementioned "Prince John"), but the approximate balance of power led to the adoption of the Magna Carta, of which the English are still so proud.
                1. 0
                  7 May 2026 18: 25
                  Yes, indeed. You're wasting your time fantasizing, because everything is well-known and easily verified. The Normans weren't a closed caste in Normandy and mingled perfectly well with the "locals." Even the Rollonids. For example, the mother of Robert the Devil and the paternal grandmother of William II the Conqueror was Judith of Brittany, daughter of Conan I, Duke of Brittany. The wife of Richard I, Duke of Normandy, was Emma of Paris, daughter of Count Hugh the Great of Paris and sister of Hugh Capet, King of France. Rollo's son, William I, married Lithgarde of Vermandois, daughter of Count Herbert II of Vermandois, and also had an extramarital affair with Sprata of Brittany, from whom the aforementioned Richard I was born.
                  Moreover, in 934, William I even faced an internal threat—a rebellion, as William of Jumièges wrote, "within Normandy"—led by the Norman Riulf, who was apparently one of the noble Normans independent of Rouen and accused the duke of being of Frankish descent and of pursuing policies too favorable to the Franks. William routed his opponents, and soon the entire territory of Normandy came under the control of Rollo's descendants.
                  Regarding religion, Rollo and his Vikings took the cross in France in 911 as part of the Treaty of Saint-Clair-sur-Epte. Moreover, Rollo was baptized by Archbishop Francon himself in Rouen. At baptism, Rollo received the name Robert.
                  His son William was a true Christian, unlike his father, and made donations to the abbey of Mont Saint-Michel and restored the monastery of Jumièges, to which he later wanted to retire.
                  Like his father, William I, Richard I also promoted the restoration of the Church in Normandy. In 960, he settled new monks at Fontenelle Abbey to restore the monastery destroyed by his ancestors. Several monks from this monastery were subsequently sent to Mont-Saint-Michel Abbey to replace the local canons. A large ducal residence was established in Fécamp, Richard's hometown, and the idea of ​​founding a monastery near Fécamp was put forward. And so on and so forth.
                  By the end of the 9th century, the Norman language was undoubtedly French, meaning, scientifically speaking, it was Old French (French: ancien français)—a collection of Romance dialects of the Oïl language group, spoken in an area roughly corresponding to the north and center of modern France, from roughly the mid-8th century to the end of the 14th century. I'm attaching a picture of Oïl. You can see three Norman dialects there. Nevertheless, even taking into account all the possible Scandinavian influences, it was FRENCH. Not Danish, not Norwegian, not Saxon. In other words, a language from a different language group. And with the Norman language, naturally, a corresponding culture emerged, with its own characteristics, of course, but it was no longer a Viking culture.
                  As for this
                  William the Conqueror himself wrote directly in a letter to Harald (his future enemy) that despite accepting Christianity, he remained a Viking at heart.
                  , then none of the available sources mention a letter from William the Conqueror addressed to Harald. So, you either made it up yourself or adopted someone else's empty fabrication. Ugh, that's a shame.
                  Study history, not fairy tales and the inventions of God knows who.
      2. 0
        6 May 2026 21: 42
        Compare it better with the pantheon of gods of Arkona and Vagrius! There are far more similarities there... From the 7th to the 11th centuries, the Vagrs were the masters of the Baltic! They controlled all trade flows. And the route from the Varangians to the Greeks appeared under their rule... Why are the Varangians called Vikings and not Vagrs!!!
    2. -1
      6 May 2026 22: 15
      Here's another theory: the Varangians are Yaga's warriors (those who swore allegiance to her). In his monograph, "Historical Information on Notable Places in Belarus with the Addition of Other Related Information," published in St. Petersburg in 1855, Mikhail Osipovich Bez-Kornilovich explores the figure of Baba Yaga in the context of ancient Slavic mythology. The author draws attention to the existence of Lake Volovoye, located beyond the Polota River, where, according to local legends, sanctuaries dedicated to Perun and Baba Yaga were located. This fact suggests that Baba Yaga occupied an equal position with Perun in the religious system of the Slavs and related peoples, being an object of veneration alongside the chief deity of thunder and lightning. Her role as a goddess of war underscores the importance of her cult, which is comparable in significance to that of Perun, one of the central figures in the Slavic pantheon. Since Yaga is the patroness of warriors and war, there must also be warriors of Yaga (Varangians).
      1. -1
        7 May 2026 13: 24
        An oath to Yaga is unlikely, however. Simply "yag" or "yug" (essentially "yogi") denoted a degree of mastery.
        A novice warrant officer in the Soviet Army was called a "praporyonok" (little prapor), a seasoned one a "praporyuga" (little prapor). The same goes for "varangian." They were simply experts in their field, most likely naval and anything related to the sea.
        Baba Yaga is simply a woman very experienced in women's affairs (not necessarily elderly), a witch, you might say, meaning "knowing," or knowledgeable. A healer, a midwife, and so on. However, the Slavic pantheon could have had now-forgotten female characters, and why not? The Slavs retained matriarchal traits for a long time. It was later that Christian priests diligently erased everything they found objectionable. And "Koshchei the Immortal" was made into a villain, although at first he was a true defender of the Russian land; perhaps this warrior-priest had a real-life prototype.
  13. 0
    April 15 2026 16: 10
    I'll grumble, as usual.
    North of the Black Sea lies Great, or Cold, Sweden...

    In the original, it's not Sweden, but Svitjod (also spelled Svithiod; Old Norse: Svíþjóð, Old Swedish: Svethiudh). That is, Great or Cold Svitjod is what Latin authors called Scythia, i.e., the country somewhere north of the Black Sea. But simply Svitjod, or Lesser Svitjod, is equated with Sweden, although Sweden proper has a more accurate name: Svealand, Sveariki. It's important to understand this and not shove the same toponym "Sweden" in and out of place. In general, on these issues, it's better to read the works of T.N. Jackson. Tatyana Nikolaevna is one of our most qualified Scandinavian historians, a teacher, and a doctor of historical sciences. I highly recommend her.

    From the Vanir clan, which many researchers tend to see as the familiar Wends. Note that the Scandinavians are completely at ease with the idea that the mythical ancestor of their kings, the Ynglings, was a Slav, and don't even think of being embarrassed about it.

    Why are so many researchers inclined to see the Wends in the Vanir? I'm just curious. And yes, why would the Scandinavians have a complex about their Ynglings? After all, it's those "many researchers" who are inclined to see the Vanir as Slavs, while the Scandinavians themselves saw the Vanir as a group of gods (!), who were, admittedly, supplanted by other gods, the Aesir, but still. And if we're going to bring in the Wends, then we should first ask linguists, let them explain whether any linguistic connection is possible beyond a simple phonetic similarity: Vendians (Latin: Venedi, Venethae, Venethi, German: Wenden; Swedish: Vender) - Vanir (Old Norse: Vanir).

    A number of historians believe that the ethnonyms and names of the Russians indicate their Germanic speaking nature.

    Not only do a number of historians believe this, but linguists also definitively state that the Rus' names are of Germanic origin. And there's no other interpretation, no matter how much one might wish. It appears in both the Rus'-Byzantine treaty of 911 and the one of 971.
    "We are from the Russian family - Karls, Inegeld, Farlaf, Veremud, Rulav, Gudy, Ruald, Karn, Frelav, Ruar, Aktevu, Truan, Lidul, Fost, Stemid..."
    "Sfenkel / Sfangel (Greek Σφέγκελος / Σφάγγελος; Old Scand. *Sveinkell), Ikmor (Greek Ἴκμορ; Old Scand. Ing(i)marr) and Sveneld (Old Russian. Svenal(b)d; other Scand. Sveinaldr)"...
    Why is there a second "s" in the word "rusov"? Rus', Rusy—one "s." Two "s" even in the word "Russia" appear much later.

    Supporters of the "southern" version believe that the word "Rus" comes from an Iranian root meaning "light", "white" (in comparison with the dark-skinned Iranian-speaking population of the northern Black Sea region - the Scythians, Sarmatians, Alans).

    Hmm, that's a strange explanation. And why on earth did the Caucasian Iranian-speaking population of the northern Black Sea region suddenly become dark-skinned? Ammianus Marcellinus wrote of the Alans that "almost all Alans were tall and handsome, with fair hair and a menacing gaze." And there were also Roxolani among the Sarmatians, i.e., "fair, brilliant Alans." What should we do with them?
    Obviously, proponents of the Iranian theory weren't aiming for a purely superficial comparison between the Slavs and the Scythians/Sarmatians, but were simply focusing on the phonetic similarity between the words "Rus" and "ruhsh," and the pleasing meaning of the Iranian word "ruhsh"—bright, shining. True, but if we look at historical retrospect, the Slavs and Sarmatians (the Scythians were already long gone) don't really compare in terms of the length of their existence in the Black Sea region. The Antes still encountered some Alans in the pre-Hunnic and Hunnic periods, but they remained Antes and didn't become the Rukhshi-Rus. In the post-Hunnic period, the Black Sea region became primarily the territory of Turkic-speaking and other tribes from the east. At first, there were the Proto-Bulgarians, the Utigurs/Kutrigurs, and also all sorts of Onogurs/Saragurs, Akatsirs, Savirs, then the Avars arrived, who are generally descended from the Rouran-Xianbei, followed by the Ugrians-Magyars, aka the Hungarians, Pechenegs, etc., etc.
    That is, the Iranian theory, despite all its beauty, flies by with a whistle.
    So what's left? Correct. But we must clearly understand that the Scandinavians played an important, but not decisive, role in the formation of Rus'. It was, as they say, a team effort. And together, the Slavs, Scandinavians, Finno-Ugrics, Balts, Turks, Iranians, and others ultimately produced what is known by the short but capacious name "Rus'." Something like that.
  14. -2
    April 15 2026 20: 20
    I would advise the author of this work to first read Helmold (a 12th-century German chronicler, priest, and missionary, author of the "Slavic Chronicle"). His work contains information on the Germanization of the lands of the Slavic and Baltic tribes (Wagrians, Obodrites, Polabians, and others), their Christianization from the 8th century to 1171, as well as a description of the personalities and deeds of some Slavic princes, as well as the customs, traditions, and way of life of the Slavs. From this, it will not be difficult to learn that there were such Slavic lands as Wagria and the island of Ruyan, and that the Slavic tribes living there in the 6th-11th centuries terrorized and devastated the lands of the Danes and Swedes. They dominated the Baltic coast and had the most powerful navy and warriors! By the way, what do you call the people from Wagria? The Swedes call them VAGRI, but the Slavs perhaps call them VARANGIANS? Who has proven that Rurik was not from Vagria? Also, the Bertinian Chronicle preserves correspondence between the Byzantine Emperor Theophilus and the Frankish Emperor Louis the Pious. In 838, a delegation from distant lands arrived in Constantinople to sign a peace treaty. Theophilus requested that several Rus' be admitted along with the Byzantine embassy. The emperor expressed concern that if they returned to their homeland (the Baltic coast) directly, they might perish at the hands of the ferocious barbarians, so he asked the king to allow them to pass through the safety of Frankish lands. Louis ordered the Rus' arrest, suspecting them of being Swedes, Swedish Vikings with whom his empire was waging an implacable war. However, after interrogation, the Rus' were released. Thus, the Rus' who arrived from Byzantium were not Swedes...
    1. +1
      April 18 2026 19: 12
      In fact, nothing is reported anywhere about the fate of the Rus' detained by Louis.
  15. +1
    April 16 2026 13: 24
    Quote: Thick
    If the Rus' (Rus) traveled by water, they inevitably used portages, and they could establish control over the most convenient ones, leaving a "service team" in place. Then a notional Russian land emerged, where the "rowers" ruled, establishing permanent settlements.

    Most likely, it was.
    1. -2
      April 20 2026 16: 19
      Yes, that's how it was. But the Vikings and Danes at that time were paying tribute to the Ruthenians (for the right to trade), and it's unlikely they could sail the eastern Baltic without their permission, much less lead the route "from the Varangians to the Greeks." The Vagrians (Varangians) commanded there, and the Scandinavians were their errand boys until the end of the 11th century... Helmold points out that these Slavs constantly attacked their western and northern neighbors—the Saxons and Danes (i.e., Vikings or Normans)—and generally lived by robbery and were constantly on the move. The capital of Slavic Vagrius was the coastal city of Aldenburg, or Stargard in Slavic, i.e., Old Town in the far west of Slavia—once the main city of all Slavia on the Baltic. The inhabitants of Stargard, located on the border of the Danish and Saxon lands, were the bravest of men and not only accepted the wars of their neighbors, but were also the first to start them, and its princes ruled not only Wagria, but also the Bodrichi and Lyutichi... (Weren't they the ones who built the new Novgorod after the Old City?)...
  16. 0
    22 August 2026 22: 11
    It's good that Russians don't learn world history from their own folk tales, like the Swedes.