Rurik. In the last article, we described the historical setting in which Rurik had to act. It's time to go directly to the main character of our study.
Chronicle of Rurik
There is very little information about Rurik himself in the Russian annals. Here is a lengthy quote from The Tale of Bygone Years, translated by D. S. Likhachev.
In an article on 862, we see the following:
“They drove the Varangians across the sea, and did not give them tribute, and began to dominate themselves, and there was no truth among them, and family after generation rose up, and they had strife, and began to fight with each other. And they said to themselves: "Let us look for a prince who would rule over us and judge by right." And they went across the sea to the Varangians, to Russia. Those Varangians were called Rus, as others are called the Swedes, and some Normans and Angles, and still other Gotlandians - that's how these are. Chud, Slovenia, Krivichi and the whole of Russia said: "Our land is great and abundant, but there is no outfit in it. Come to reign and rule over us." And three brothers with their families were elected, and took all Russia with them, and came, and the eldest, Rurik, sat in Novgorod, and the other, Sineus, - on Beloozero, and the third, Truvor, - in Izborsk. And from those Varangians the Russian land was nicknamed. The Novgorodians are those people from the Varangian family, and before they were Slovenes. Two years later, Sineus and his brother Truvor died. And only Rurik took all the power, and began to distribute cities to his men - to Polotsk, to this Rostov, to another Beloozero. The Varangians in these cities are discoverers, and the indigenous population in Novgorod is the Slovenian, in Polotsk - the Krivichi, in Rostov - the Merya, in the Bel Ozero - the whole, in Murom - the Murom, and Rurik ruled over all of them. And he had two husbands, not his relatives, but boyars, and they asked to go to Constantinople with their kin. And they set off along the Dnieper, and when they sailed past, they saw a small city on the mountain. And they asked: "Whose town is this?" The same answered: "There were three brothers, Kiy, Schek and Khoriv, who built this town and disappeared, and we are sitting here, their descendants, and pay tribute to the Khazars." Askold and Dir remained in this city, gathered many Varangians and began to own the land of the glades. Rurik reigned in Novgorod."
The second (and last) mention of Rurik in the annals is in an article dedicated to 879:
"Rurik died and handed over his reign to Oleg, his relative, giving him his son Igor, for he was still very small."
And it's all. There is no more information about Rurik itself. By and large, it was on these lines and only on them for the first two hundred years that all disputes about the origin of Rurik, his deeds and his significance for Russian history were built.
Most of the copies were broken around Rurik's origin. Who is he - a Scandinavian, a Slav or a Balt (Prussian)? Even theories were put forward that he was of Polish origin.
For nearly three hundred years of disputes between Normanists and anti-Normanists, the text of The Tale of Bygone Years has been analyzed so many times down to the letter, received so many interpretations, especially in terms of who the “Varangians” were, that it seems to me inappropriate to analyze these few lines again.
Why are they arguing?
The ideological component of the question about the origin of Rurik, introduced into this seemingly purely scientific dispute by M. V. Lomonosov, has always largely prevented researchers from soberly assessing the already meager data available to them. Lomonosov in this respect can still be understood: in his time, history was considered by all researchers without exception as a set of acts of persons vested with power over a certain territory. It was believed that it was their will, abilities and energy that were not the main, but the only engine of historical processes. Such concepts as "economic base", "production relations", "surplus product", which are used by modern historians, did not yet exist in those days and the historical process was considered exclusively in the context of the deeds and accomplishments of princes, kings, khans, kings, emperors and their confidants, who, by the way, in this case were fully responsible for their results. Responsibility, however, was not before the people, but before God, but nevertheless, they carried it. For sincerely believing people of that time, this was not an empty phrase.
Based on these premises, such a painful reaction of Lomonosov and the scientists and dignitaries who supported him, including Empress Elizabeth, to the statement about the Scandinavian origin of the Varangians, expressed in G. F. Miller in 1749, I repeat, in general, can be understood. Russia recently ended the victorious war with Sweden in 1741-1743, the memories of it are still fresh in the memory of many of its participants, the superiority over the Swedes, approved by Peter I, is once again proven, and then suddenly some German is a German! - dares to assert that the creator of the Russian state was a Swede.
Lomonosov's emotional passage only confirms the bright ideological coloring of his objections to the work of a respectable, very talented and impartial German scientist.
It seems all the more strange now, when historical science has stepped far ahead, and the role of the individual in history has been radically revised, the attempts of some figures trying to realize their ambitions on the field of history, to look at the historical process from the standpoint of the so-called "scientific patriotism" and seriously try to prove the Slavic the origin of Rurik, using not scientific research as evidence, but patriotic appeals. By and large, the very term "scientific patriotism" by its author A. A. Klesov crossed out all the scientific significance of his own "historical" works, if such had ever taken place. Politics, and hence patriotism, since this is a political term, has no place in science - any! - if she is busy looking for objective truth, otherwise it is simply not science.
Rurikovich N1c1
To clarify the issue of the origin of Rurik and, accordingly, the entire Rurik dynasty, it will be much more useful to turn to the materials of modern genetic research, in which the descendants of the Rurik people, our contemporaries, participated.
In 2012, in my opinion, the publication of an article by V. G. Volkova "Do all Rurikovich descend from one ancestor?" In it, the author, based on studies of the genetic material of living representatives of the dynasty, who consider themselves the descendants of Rurik, arguably proved the Scandinavian origin of Rurik, determining that most of the representatives of the dynasty, the authenticity of the genealogy of which is least questioned, are indeed consanguineous of varying degrees and are carriers haplogroup N1c1. Moreover, V. G. Volkov even managed to localize the region in which this haplogroup with the corresponding markers characteristic of the Rurik, formed, according to the researcher's calculations about 1500 years ago, is still most widespread - this is the area of Uppsala in Sweden, that is, it is Uppsala that is the most likely place of origin of Rurik's ancestors.
Rurikovichi R1a
In addition to the N1c1 haplogroup, the R1a haplogroup was found in some of the subjects who considered themselves descendants of the Rurik. These are princes Obolensky, Volkonsky, Baryatinsky, Shuisky, Karpov, Beloselsky-Belozersky and Drutsky-Sokolinsky. However, a detailed study of their genetic code showed that most of them are not even blood relatives, that is, their haplotypes belong to different subunits, of which there are as many as four in this group of seven people. In addition, the pedigree of those of them who are nevertheless genetic relatives - princes Volkonsky, Obolensky and Baryatinsky - was questioned back in the 19th century, long before Volkov's article was published. The fact is that according to genealogical books, all of them are descendants of Prince Yuri Tarussky, who was considered the son of Mikhail Vsevolodovich of Chernigov, despite the fact that according to the chronicles, Mikhail had only one son - Rostislav. In addition, more than 120 years passed between the death of Mikhail Chernigovsky (1245, 66 years old) and the reliably recorded death of one of his hypothetical grandchildren - Prince Konstantin Yuryevich Obolensky (1367, age unknown). Such a time gap, as well as the complete absence of any information about Prince Yuri Tarusa himself, more than a hundred years ago led researchers to the idea of an error or deliberate manipulation of the genealogies of these princes. Research by V. G. Volkov only confirmed these suspicions. With a high degree of probability, it can be assumed that in the XV - XVI centuries. the ancestors of the princes Volkonsky, Obolensky and Baryatinsky ascribed to themselves a princely origin in order to increase their local status and be able to claim higher and lucrative positions at the grand ducal, and later at the royal court.
A little about adultery
The version that the Scandinavian haplogroup among the Rurikids appeared due to the betrayal of Princess Irina-Ingigerda to her husband Yaroslav the Wise with the Norwegian king Olaf Svyaty, from whom Prince Vsevolod Yaroslavich was allegedly born, the father of Vladimir Monomakh and the common ancestor of the majority of Russian), in my opinion, cannot be taken seriously. This is already reminiscent of some kind of anti-Normanist hysteria in the style of "you are at our door, and we are at the window." In addition, it is humanly dishonest to accuse a woman of adultery on the basis of idle gossip (“Gothic fables”, as the founder of Russian anti-Normanism MV Lomonosov said), it should be remembered that in the case of Ingigerda we are not dealing with a dissolute XVIII century, when the crowned persons allowed themselves to give birth from anyone, and not even with the courtly European XIII century, when platonic love for a married lady was encouraged in every possible way (other women existed for carnal pleasures), but with the harsh XI century. Ingigerda was flesh of the flesh of the Swedish kings, brought up in the appropriate traditions and perfectly knew and understood her duty to her husband, home and family.
Thus, given that the Scandinavian, namely the Swedish origin of the Rurik is scientifically confirmed by modern genetic research, I think it is not worth going back to the consideration of the Slavic, Baltic or any other version of the origin of Rurik.
