Comments by "Варяжский вопрос" (@normanism) on "Styrman" channel.

Every ruler of Rus' had his own original sign. Sending a messenger to one of his towns, he gave him a seal with his sign which certified his authority. It made sense because there were many rulers and many towns. The symbol Ukraine borrowed as its state emblem is not Rurik's sign or the sign of Rurikids but a personal sign of Vladimir. He was an important ruler which brought Christianity to Rus but his symbol was not a state emblem of whole Rus. His father, brothers, sons and grandsons had different signs.
3
The Ilmen Hills culture emerged on the banks of the Volkhov River and the shores of Lake Ilmen in the 8th century from early Slavic migrants and local Finno-Ugric tribes. It is impossible to say where these migrants came from, since early Slavic antiquities are very poor. However, some Danube finds are found in their inventory, which allows us to talk about migrations from the Danube region. This does not make them "southern Slavs", since the southern Slavic languages were much more prominent, and the Danube region was the center of the formation the early Slavs.
2
@D3lpDelight Rutheni was a Celtic tribe of Southern France. In Latin written sources they called Rus "Rugi", "Rutheni" and "Rutuli" using the names of famous tribes of the past. Referring them is not historically accurate.
2
Ruses were the Scandinavians who settled down on the trade route from Volga to Baltic sea. Gorodische was one of their earliest towns. It has both elite Scandinavian antiques and a fortress which proves it was an administrative centre in the 9th century.
2
@ nobody knows how thise nomads called themselves Everyone know them only under some Rus-like name so there is no way they called themselves some other way. Ruses is the name of slavs that lived in Rus People lived around Kiev called themselves "Polyane", nobody knew the word Rus unless vikings came. they got to dnipro river because of north to south trade route The route from North to South never existed. All the earlier activity of Rus'es was about the route from Baltic to Volga. In the first written source mentioning Rus'es (rhos) under 839 they called their leader a "khagan" apparently referring a Khazarian khagan. not a single word said about this settlement as the administrative center As I said there are 2 markers: fortress and the elite antiques which allow us to assume such an interpretation. Nosov also wrote that Gorodishe with its amount of Scandinavian antiques aims Birka and Hedeby. And by the way, accordingly Ukrainian archeologist A.Komar, Kiev did not have signs of an administrative centre unless the "town of Vladimir" was built. it was not a capital I didn't say it was a capital, I used the words town and administrative centre. there was ALREADY a non tribal kingsdom Nothing shows that Eastern Slavs had any signs of elite in the 9th century. dont be ashamed, ussr made up history ti appel the moscow is kind of a fairy tale In USSR they stated that Kiev was 1500-years old and considered Polanians as real Ruses fighting with the "Western influence". So you best blow off the dust from Soviet books and pray on them. As you can see from this video in Western schools Ruses are Vikings and Swedes so there is no way somebody believes they were "Ukrainians".
2
the ending -ische (compare Selische) means that the settlement was abandoned. Archeological excavations prove it as we know that the 9th century fortress fell apart in the end of the 9th century and nobody tried to restore it. So for the local people this place was a "former fortress".
1
@ город, то есть крепость, на Городище поплыл ещё в 9-м веке, так что для местных жителей это мог быть действительно "бывший город".
1
"И въшедъ на горы сиа, и благослови я, и постави крестъ, и помолився Богу, и слѣзе съ горы сея, идеже послѣже бысть Киевъ и поиде по Днѣпру горѣ"
1
@alexpotienko4545 hmm sounds complicated. Long story short: there are no medieval written sources with the modern Ukrainian writing "Kyiv" so there is no any reason to use it referring Rus.
1
@alexpotienko4545 И бысть Кыѥвъ мати градомъ рускымъ In other words there were 2 Russian-like spellings: "Kyev" and "Kiev", both are historically accurate and used in the same sources. Again, what is the point to use Ukrainian form "Kyiv" if it was never used in written sources?
1
@alexpotienko4545 it doesn't answer my question. What is the reason to use the modern Ukrainian form Kyiv if it's neither the English form nor historical? The form Kiev the author used is both historical and English.
1
@alexpotienko4545 seems like not having the actual arguments you try making up false analogies.
1
@alexpotienko4545 yes my channel is dedicated to the Norman origins of the Rus. The more accurate quote is: "и воєвати почаша сами на сѧ [и] рѣша сами в себѣ . поищемъ собѣ кнѧзѧ" (Laurentian Codex considered the oldest)
1
@ the oldest version of the Primal Chronicle, the Lavrentyev codex says: "и воєвати почаша сами на сѧ [и] рѣша сами в себѣ . поищемъ собѣ кнѧзѧ . иже бъı володѣлъ нами . и судилъ по праву".
1
@alexpotienko4545 textual criticism teaches to choose the earliest possible version of a written source as the most correct. The Lavrentyev codex is dated 14th century and Ipatyev is about 100 years later.
1
@alexpotienko4545 the sword in all Slavic languages is "miecz". You can't derive from it "varang". Also Slavic languages have no suffix "ang".
1
@alexpotienko4545 Norman origins of Rurikids are consensual in world science. I don't see why you call it "Moscow". And of course they do not depend on reading of one single phrase in the Primal Chronicle.
1
@alexpotienko4545 Have you heard of an etymological dictionary? Anyway, to be considered "Slavic" the word should have a Slavic root and etymology. Apparently the word "varang" has no any Slavic root and the fact it exists only in one local dialect means it was derived by this one tribe. The Ukrainian and Russian word "svara" ("argument") comes from Proto-Slavic *svãrъ then from Proto-Indo-European root *swer- (“to resound, enunciate, pronounce; to swear”). Cognate with English "answer", "swear". It has the root "svar", not "var".
1
@alexpotienko4545 Considering that there is absolutely NOTHING about Rus in Scandinavian sources In historical science, the "argument of silence" is considered unscientific. Only the presence of some information can be considered an argument, not its absence. And of course the etymology of the word doesn't depend on presence or absence of written sources. If even there were no neither Icelandic sags, nor Russian Primal Chronicle we would find out Rus'es were Scandinavians from what we know about them from foreign written sources and archeology.
1
@alexpotienko4545 History is not an exact science, and its concepts are politically biased Sounds like sophistry. History studies the facts of the past, and their reliability is established by parallel independent sources. Several contemporaries from the 9th-10th centuries say that the Rus'es were Normans. For example, the Annals of Bertin record how the Russian ambassadors in 839 were identified as Swedes. Liutprand of Cremona and John the Deacon call Igor's Rus'es "Normans". In the treaties of Oleg and Igor in 911 and 944, the names of the princely family are almost entirely Scandinavian. Thus, even without any Rurik, we come to the Scandinavian origin of Rus.
1
@ History is not an exact science, and its concepts are politically biased Sounds like sophistry. History studies the facts of the past, and their reliability is established by parallel independent sources. Several contemporaries from the 9th-10th centuries say that the Ruses were Normans. For example, the Annals of Bertin record how the Russian ambassadors were identified as Swedes. Liutprand of Cremona and John the Deacon call Igor`s Ruses "Normans". In the treaties of Oleg and Igor in 911 and 944, the names of the princely family are almost entirely Scandinavian. Thus, even without any Rurik, we come to the Scandinavian origin of Rus.
1
@ Considering that there is absolutely NOTHING about Rus in Scandinavian sources In historical science, the argument of silence is considered unscientific. Only the presence of some information can be an argument, not its absence. And of course the etymology of the word doesn't depend on presence or absence of written sources.
1
@alexpotienko4545 Well any silence can't be an argument. Also don't forget the sagas were written down only in Iceland, so we actually don't know what was going on in Sweden iself in the 9th century. Archeology is really undisputed source - it shows that the closest analogies between Russian elite / military burial traditions (ship cremations and chamber ingumations) are in Eastern Sweden. There is a difference between when the word was written down (some languages don't even have a writing tradition) and when it was used in the spoken language. I don't see how the coin of the times of Vladimir could debate the origins of Rus'es of 9th century?
1
@alexpotienko4545 The so called Serpent Walls you refer to were mostly built in the times of Vladimir and Yaroslav (end of Xth and XIth century), actually the Primal Chronicle directly says about their building. But they also confuse them with the walls of Scythian towns of VI-Vth BCE and the walls built by Russian empire in 18th century against Crimeans. The VI century was the time of Sclavins and Ants, both cultures: Praga-Korchak and Penkovka were pretty poor and don't have any signs of the central administration in archeology. That time Proto-Slavic tribes were attacking Danubian borders of Byzantium and Procopius of Caesarea said they did not have rulers and lived in "democracy".
1
@alexpotienko4545 So he calls the Rus "Rhos" and not Normans "Closer to the north, there are people that the Greeks (Greci) call Rusios by their appearance, but we call them Normans by their location. After all, in Teutonum nord means north, and man means man; that's why northern people can be called Normans. The king (rex) of those people was [someone] named Inger, who, having gathered a thousand and even more ships, came to Constantinople". Ioann the Dean: "At this time, the Norman people (Normannorum gentes) with three hundred and sixty ships dared to approach the city of Constantinople".
1
@alexpotienko4545 The form of the word "Rus'" is not Slavic. If you refer to the river Ros', the Slavic ethnonyms derived from the hydronyms have specific form: Visla - Visliane Bug - Buzhane Morava - Moravane Pena - Czerezpeniane Volga - Volzhane, etc In Novgorod area there is a river "Russa" and the city with the same name (nowadays Staraya Russa). The people lived by the shores of the Russa river called in the Novgorod Primal Chronicle "porshane" and the people of the city Russa: "rushane". In other words, if the river Ros' really gave it's name to a Slavic tribe, it would have a Slavic form "roshane" or "rshane" but not Rus'. On the other hand, the form of the name Rus' is typical for the ethnonyms derived from foreign languages, compare: lappi - lopi - лопь, suomi - sumi - сумь, livi - ливь, vadja - vodi - водь, dani - doni - донь, etc
1
@alexpotienko4545 you can prove it only showing any Latin written source where they call Normans anyone but Scandinavians. For example Western Slavs.
1
*Gorodische (from Gorod - town)
1
The historical name of Roslagen is Roþen. They believe that when the first Eastern Slavs reached the area of Ladoga the local Finno-Ugric people living there told them about "Ruotsi" people (the name of Sweden in Finnish and Estonian) so "Rus'" came from Ruotsi and not directly from an Old-Norse word related with "rowing".
1
Great video, you've covered a big volume of information. However I'd like to make some little notes which I believe may help you in following projects. You refer to the so called "Ioachim Chronicle" but it was written by Vasily Tatischev in XVIIIth century so it is not a real medieval chronicle. Also, according to the latest investigations, Peryn may be the remains of a burial mound, and not an ancient Slavic temple. Lev Klein writes about this in his book "The Resurrection of Perun". The migration of the West Slavs to Novgorod is highly questionable, since no West Slavic burial grounds have ever been found. West Baltic pottery may be an import or a local imitation. The Novgorod dialect does not originate from any West Slavic (Lechitic) language, since it has only 2 incomplete palatalizations, while all West Slavic languages have 3. It is most likely that the Novgorod dialect is the language of the people who left the area of the formation of the Proto-Slavic language earliest, before it underwent 3 palatalizations, while all other Slavs passed the "eye of the needle" of three palatalizations.
1
Rus did not have neither a lion emblem nor yellow/blue colors. The most likely that yellow and blue colors Ukraine obtained when its ruler Mazepa provided the Swedish king Karl the 12th and his army support in the war against Russia in 1700s. So Karl allowed Ukraine officially using the colors of Swedish federates.
1
Rather a corruption scheme to launder money from American and European taxpayers.
1
Kiev is the correct spelling. That way it is in English and that way it was in all the Old Russian written sources. "И въшедъ на горы сиа, и благослови я, и постави крестъ, и помолився Богу, и слѣзе съ горы сея, идеже послѣже бысть Киевъ и поиде по Днѣпру горѣ" "Се же соуть имена кнѧземъ Києвьскым . кнѧжившим . в Києвѣ . до избитьѧ Батыєва . в поганьствѣ боудоущиим" "Се повѣсти времѧньнъıх лѣт . ѿкуду єсть пошла рускаӕ земѧ . кто въ києвѣ нача первѣє кнѧжит А и ѿкуду рускаӕ землѧ стала єсть"
1