2
Who exactly were the Rus culturally and genetically? Can we even be sure they were "Slavic"?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rus%27...Slavic_sources
We're told by historians that the east Slavs lived all the way northeast to the Finnics and Estonians. But yet why does the chronicle of the Rus not give them any precedence over the other groups, even though their language is the one they used as a lingua franca?
"The tributaries of the Varangians drove them back beyond the sea and, refusing them further tribute, set out to govern themselves. There was no law among them, but tribe rose against tribe. Discord thus ensued among them, and they began to war one against the other. They said to themselves, "Let us seek a prince who may rule over us, and judge us according to the Law". They accordingly went overseas to the Varangian Russes: these particular Varangians were known as Russes, just as some are called Swedes, and others Normans, English, and Gotlanders, for they were thus named. The Chuds, the Slavs, the Krivichians and the Ves' then said to the people of Rus', "Our land is great and rich, but there is no order in it. Come to rule and reign over us". Thus they selected three brothers, with their kinsfolk, who took with them all the Russes and migrated. The oldest, Rurik, located himself in Novgorod; the second, Sineus, at Beloozero; and the third, Truvor, in Izborsk. On account of these Varangians, the district of Novgorod became known as the land of Rus'.[10]"
.
The Rus themselves were of course Scandinavian
The Chuds were Finnic: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chud
The Krivichs are said to be Slavs, but there is good reason to believe they were a Baltic tribe that just accepted the Slavic language: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Krivichs
Otherwise, why would the Rus chronicle separate "Krivichs" from "Slavs" in general? The only reason I can think of is if Krivichs were mostly Balts genetically anyway.
The hydronymy of the Rus area was Baltic in origin: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikiped...cation_map.png
and so was the surrounding culture from the 3rd to 4th centuries: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikiped...rope_3-4cc.png
The Ves were Finnic: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vepsians
and the Slavs that were mentioned were Novgorod Slavs: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Novgorod_Slavs
So out of the 5 groups mentioned, only one can be said for sure to be Slavic in origin. But can we even say this to be a sure deal? This paper suggests otherwise, by saying that the Novogorod "Slavs" had burial practices just like the surrounding Balts:
https://www.academia.edu/2245308/The...10th_Centuries
pg. 31:
>The results of recent genetic studies have not been integrated in the theory of Slavicization of Northern Russia or in the study of the ethnical backgroundof the Long Barrow Culture. The reason for this might lie in the fact that the human biological data supports the settlement continuity theory by showing the Northern Russians to have closer genetic affinities with the Baltic Finns and the Latvians than with the other Slavic populations.
>Thus the people of North-Western Russia did not arrive as migrants from the so-called Slavic homeland but developed in the present area. This overthrows both
the theory of the early migration of the Slavs and the theory of the migration of Slavs on the whole. The linguistic and cultural Slavicization of Northern Russia did not occur as a result of mass migration but some other processes.
>The research history of long barrows is a good example of the complications of creating national historical myths for a multinational giant state. The theory of the migrations of people from the original home was constructed by linguists so that its narrative should correspond to the reports written down in the chronicles at the beginning of the 12th century.
I think all of this is good evidence for the notion that the Slavic ethnicity in general developed as a lingua franca over periods of hundreds of years between the end of the Roman empire and the creation of the Rus. It's unclear why the other ethnic groups decided to adopt Slavic as a lingua franca as opposed to Baltic, let's say, but I'm guessing it's because it was the best midway point linguistically between all the others.
Reply With Quote
Originally Posted by Tigranes
I do indeed know how to trigger ruskis, it doesn't matter how many Armenians choose to identify as "Russian", Russians are Asian people, btw I have no idea about who these people are...
England
Bookmarks